正在加载视频...
视频加载失败
"User interfaces are largely going to go away. Because the agents speak English, or other languages. You can talk to them. You can say what you want. The UI can be generated. So I can say, generate me a set of buttons that allows me to solve this problem,... show more
305,166 次观看 • 15 天前 •via X (Twitter)
37 条评论
This 🤡 already predicted that young people would change names when they become adults because of the crazy stuff they would post online while young. His ability to predict the future is that of a third grader.
The WIMP paradigm (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) was engineered around human ocular bandwidth and mouse clicks.
Full video
Eric has the good fortune of being famous, wealthy, and knows enough edgy people who tell him what they think. UI isn’t going away because eyes aren’t going away. UI is changing, and its share of interaction will changed, but interfaces are still bound by our mental constraints.
I call bullshit on this. A huge bullshit actually. Why do we use paper at all today, we could just memorize things right? Why do we watch movies, we could just read right? Why do we play games we could just imagine playing it right? Utter bullshit!
Quite a few products wouldn’t even need screens at all if we can give it voice commands. Like my oven or thermostat.
Yes, AI will very much redefine how we interact with machine. I for one have almost stopped using keyboard.
@Marco20307855 Love your posts and although I talk sometimes I don’t want to talk all the time to interact with a computer. Just like buttons making a comeback in cars, UI may have a much longer life than “going away”. Pendulum swings
@rohanpaul_ai I don’t think anyone is suggesting that screens will be eliminated but that there are some contexts and applications where they are not necessary.
No it’s not lmao. Humans are at the end of the supply chain and consume websites. Why would they go away? Are people just gonna start reading binary machine code?
Hold on here, Eric Schmidt is making a claim that our ears are a better input device than our eyes? That sounds like he's selling the public more garbage like google glass.
@Huopainen ”You can talk to them” - have you heard an average person trying to form a coherent and logical series of thoughts verbally, on the spot? How was it for you? 🙂
The interface just got promoted to optional homework.
Elon said the same thing, without specifically mentioning agents.
Not just web but computing in general. This is what I've been thinking for a while. Why keep adding more abstractions when you can remove layers? You don't always need a UI but when you do why not have it procedurally generated based on context? Sometimes less is more.
people don't want to talk to a box to compare 15 flights at once visual density still wins for actual decisions, you just won't need to click through the checkout forms anymore
Agree.
Oversimplification. The amount of skill and technical knowledge that is required to correctly steer an LLM is stunning and is what makes a final product stand out vs blend into the slop category. Few understand this as only few have that skill.
Generated buttons are still a UI. The product is who owns the ticket when it fails.
schmidt is the charlatan who ruined google. i doubt UIs will disappear.
其实现在很多后台服务已经这么做了，未来整个Web基础设施都得跟着这个方向重构，挺有意思的。
Hmmm... here is what Grok gave me for a shed roof house with no garage and an atrium extending OUT from its middle third.
Ya sure. This will NOT happen. You don’t want to talk to a computer all the time.
Already said this to an UI designer and he told me that I don’t know what I’m talking about. Looks like it’s becoming reality. 😅
Thnik big. Don't listen to that guy spouting crap, dressing up trivial stuff like user interfaces in a serious tone—listen to me. We need to build humanoids, develop new construction methods suited to robots, and raise a 300-story building!!!!!!!!
Except I am old fashion. I prefer the GUI style interface rather than voice. Talking takes way too much energy from me.
It kinds makes sense. Websites wont last forever.
You're aware that people often go to a site and look at what's there to FIGURE OUT what they want? Heads empty. Killing UIs would crush overall engagement velocity.
The shift from interfaces to intent is fascinating.
I would say the UI isn't disappearing, it's shifting to the prompt layer, and that prompt layer will be the most contested real estate on the internet. Right now, Google owns discovery. Agents break that. When an LLM picks your restaurant, your SaaS tool, your news source, the "interface" is the training data and the system prompt. Brand, SEO, design, onboarding funnels, all bypassed. So the war isn't about buttons. It's about becoming the default noun in the model's mind. That's a different game than web3 ever was, and most companies aren't ready
I wonder how and where will the AI slop thing fit in here? And will humans adapt to it at the anticipated pace? I guess, most of us love seeing colors and visuals.
Generating a UI is the easy half. The hard half is the same request producing the same buttons tomorrow. You can't build a habit, a tutorial or a support process on an interface reinvented per prompt.
We have to remember we lived like forever before flickering screens, guis, keyboards, and mice. All of this was always crutches. This is not our natural state.
Generated UI is compelling, but I suspect the durable primitive is not the button set. It is the agent’s shared state, permissions, and ability to explain what changed between steps.
There is a reason why he former CEO of google
Generated interfaces do look like the natural next layer. The hard part is preserving user control when the UI is created on demand, especially for accessibility and repeatability.
I'll believe UIs are dead when I stop seeing Bloomberg terminals. Generated interfaces will own the one-off tasks, sure. But anything you do 100x a day lives in muscle memory, not prompts.
![Sequoia partner Pat Grady says software is shifting from apps that demand attention to agents that work quietly in the background. This shift will change what moats will look like, and will be especially hard for incumbents to deal with. "It's two very different business paradigms," he says. "In an era of apps, you want a lot of surface area with your customers, you want them to spend a lot of time in your product." "In an era of agents, things can just be running passively in the background. The amount of surface area you have with your customers, the amount of time they might spend in your product might be de minimis. So the nature of the moat that you [will need to build] is different." "I think we'll see a lot of companies in the coming years able to live in the software world and have some of the workflows people are accustomed to. And then separately they can deploy these passive agents that kind of function as coworkers who just come back to you when things are done."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2012303522474377326/amplify_video_thumb/2012302721999847427/img/WZhg-X-Po4lfOYUk.jpg)
![Airtable's Howie Liu says that basically everyone will need to graduate from being ICs to ICs that manage teams of 20-30 agents: "The best developers today don't just sit there in front of their IDEs and synchronously talk to their agent." "[Instead], you have like 30 separate branches that are each being worked on by a different agent. And you can have the agents continue to update the branches based on human and other agent feedback." "And I think this whole idea of it taking hours for that entire loop to complete — agent pushes some changes, the changes get feedback from other agents or humans, the agent responds to that — that whole loop could be hours, not just minutes. So you're not going to just sit there and watch it one at a time." "But the powerful thing about this is, each one is still actually operating faster than a human engineer. One agent on one branch can do the work of maybe three humans, operating 3x as fast. So it's like a 10x leverage factor just for one agent." "But the best engineers are now able to multitask and say, 'I'm going to oversee my own little team of 20-30 agents working concurrently.'" "Everyone needs to graduate from being an IC to an IC manager of agents. Meaning, if you're a VC analyst, your job should no longer be to go synchronously research one company. You need to go and research like 30 companies, and do them all faster, better, and higher quality than you could before." "That's the greatest leap that is going to be challenging for a lot of people in a lot of roles. Because it's a totally different mentality in how you operate, and what your role is."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2046698073511141425/amplify_video_thumb/2046698001637453824/img/pnyhxL9xXxUoN__D.jpg)
![Sequoia partner Pat Grady says software is shifting from apps that demand attention to agents that work quietly in the background. This shift will change what moats will look like, and will be especially hard for incumbents to deal with. "It's two very different business paradigms," he says. "In an era of apps, you want a lot of surface area with your customers, you want them to spend a lot of time in your product." "In an era of agents, things can just be running passively in the background. The amount of surface area you have with your customers, the amount of time they might spend in your product might be de minimis. So the nature of the moat that you [will need to build] is different." "I think we'll see a lot of companies in the coming years able to live in the software world and have some of the workflows people are accustomed to. And then separately they can deploy these passive agents that kind of function as coworkers who just come back to you when things are done." From his appearance on the show in January.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2043351022366798022/amplify_video_thumb/2043350961763360769/img/qpBVo07pXHLSdfr-.jpg)
