“Bard with x model” actually made a lot of sense to me! (still miss ya, Bard)!
most of the time i care very little about what something is called. what bugs me is when a product doesn’t explain itself, what it can do and can I use it for free (at least til I can see the value in paying). that’s still the opportunity for UX and content design, to guide users to what they need and are willing to pay for. I’m not hopeful we can turn the tide of model naming nerdery but we can at least remember users are people, not computers ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I wish the models UI reflected what they are useful for. Like you said "The chat interface itself isn’t intuitive for most people. Prompting is a skill—one that power users have developed over time. For everyone else, it’s a barrier to entry."
The chat interface feels very terminal inspired!
What if we have specific models named for specific tasks e.g. "Journal" "Day planner" "Image" that then took people through flows which asked them questions to help get to a more desired outcome. It's too open ended right now.
“Bard with x model” actually made a lot of sense to me! (still miss ya, Bard)!
most of the time i care very little about what something is called. what bugs me is when a product doesn’t explain itself, what it can do and can I use it for free (at least til I can see the value in paying). that’s still the opportunity for UX and content design, to guide users to what they need and are willing to pay for. I’m not hopeful we can turn the tide of model naming nerdery but we can at least remember users are people, not computers ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I wish the models UI reflected what they are useful for. Like you said "The chat interface itself isn’t intuitive for most people. Prompting is a skill—one that power users have developed over time. For everyone else, it’s a barrier to entry."
The chat interface feels very terminal inspired!
What if we have specific models named for specific tasks e.g. "Journal" "Day planner" "Image" that then took people through flows which asked them questions to help get to a more desired outcome. It's too open ended right now.
“But if AI is going to live up to its promise, naming can’t just serve its makers; It has to serve the people using it”
“signalling technical prowess”
At a certain point you have to wonder if they’re even trying to prioritize serving non-technical users over technical ones with choices like this🤷♀️