←back to thread

858 points cryptophreak | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
taeric ◴[] No.42934898[source]
I'm growing to the idea that chat is a bad UI pattern, period. It is a great record of correspondence, I think. But it is a terrible UI for doing anything.

In large, I assert this is because the best way to do something is to do that thing. There can be correspondence around the thing, but the artifacts that you are building are separate things.

You could probably take this further and say that narrative is a terrible way to build things. It can be a great way to communicate them, but being a separate entity, it is not necessarily good at making any artifacts.

replies(17): >>42934997 #>>42935058 #>>42935095 #>>42935264 #>>42935288 #>>42935321 #>>42935532 #>>42935611 #>>42935699 #>>42935732 #>>42935789 #>>42935876 #>>42935938 #>>42936034 #>>42936062 #>>42936284 #>>42939864 #
SoftTalker ◴[] No.42935611[source]
Yes, agree. Chatting with a computer has all the worst attributes of talking to a person, without any of the intuitive understanding, nonverbal cues, even tone of voice, that all add meaning when two human beings talk to each other.
replies(4): >>42935666 #>>42935682 #>>42936328 #>>42984355 #
aylmao ◴[] No.42935682[source]
I would also call it having all the worst attributes of a CLI, without the succinctness, OS integration, and program composability of one.
replies(1): >>42936090 #
1. 1ucky ◴[] No.42936090{3}[source]
You should check out out MCP by Anthropic, which solves some of the issues you mentioned.