Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apps SDK

developers.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 397 posts

Re: Apps SDK

#201

Post by zdragnar »

ryandrake wrote: post #167
peab wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

agree. Thing is, for those who paid attention to the last chatBot hype cycle, we already knew this. Look at how Google Assistant was portrayed back in 2016. People thought you'd be buying starbucks via the chat. Turns out the starbucks app has a better UX

Yea, I don't want to sit there at my computer, which can handle lots of different input methods, like keyboard, mouse, clicking, dragging, or my phone which can handle gestures, pinching, swiping... and try to articulate what I need it to do in English language conversation. This is actually a step backwards in human-computer interaction. To use an extreme example: imagine instead of a knob on my stereo for volume, I…

Remember Alexa? Amazon kept wanting people to buy things with their voice via assorted echo devices, but it turns out people really want to actually be in charge of what their computers are doing, rather than talking out loud and hoping for the best.

Re: Apps SDK

#202

Post by LudwigNagasena »

Glad to see no AGI hubris in this presentation, but we also haven’t see anything groundbreaking: their own version of GUI plugins, their own version of a workflow builder, and an aspiration to take cut of every transaction on the web.

I hope their GUI integration will be eventually superseded by native UI integration. I remember such well thought out concepts dating back to 2018 (https://uxdesign.cc/redesigning-siri-and-adding-multitasking...).

Re: Apps SDK

#203

Post by zdragnar »

anal_reactor wrote: post #194
freehorse wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an alarm, there is only one parameter to set. In more complex tasks, chat is a bad ui because it does not scale well and it does not offer good ways to arrange information. Eg if I want to buy something and I have a bunch of constraints, I would rather use a search-based UI where i can fast tweak these constraints and decide. Chathpt being smart or not here is irrelevant, it would just be bad ui for the task.

You're thinking in wrong categories. Suppose you want to buy a table. You could say "I'm looking for a €400 100x200cm table, black" and these are your search criteria. But that's not what you actually want. What you actually want is a table that fits your use case and looks nice and doesn't cost much, and "€400 100x200cm table, black" is a discrete approximation of your initial fuzzy search. A chatbot could talk to y…

Funny, I almost always don't want to talk to store employees about what I want. I want to browse their stock and decide for myself. This is especially true for anything that I have even a bit of knowledge about.

Re: Apps SDK

#204

Post by s__s »

artursapek wrote: post #124
fidotron wrote: post #50

This conception makes sense iff you believe in ChatGPT as the universal user interface of the future. If anything the agentic wave is showing that the chat interfaces are better off hidden behind stricter user interface paradigms.

Once it's efficient enough, you will be able to just vocally talk to your computer to do all of this. Text chat is just the simplest form of a natural language interface, which is obviously the future of computing.

I don’t think natural language is efficient enough. Whether that be text or voice.

I imagine the Star Trek vision is pretty accurate. You occasionally talk to the computer when it makes sense, but more often than not you’re still interacting with a GUI of some kind.

Re: Apps SDK

#205

Post by koreth1 »

anal_reactor wrote: post #151
munk-a wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have yet to see a chat agent deployed that is more popular than tailored browsing methods. The most charitable way to explain this is that the tailored browsing methods already in place are the results of years of careful design and battle testing and that the chat agent is providing most of the value that a tailored browsing method would but without any of the investment required to bring a traditional UX to fruit…

> the tailored browsing methods already in place are the results of years of careful design and battle testing Have you ever worked in a corporation? Do you really think that Windows 8 UI was the fruit of years of careful design? What about Workday? > but it is bizarre that so many businesses seem to be discarding battle tested UXes for chatbots Not really. If the chatbot is smart enough then chatbot is the more natu…

> I've seen people who prefer to say "hey siri set alarm clock for 10 AM" rather than use the UI. Which makes sense, because language is the way people literally have evolved specialized organs for.

I don't think it's necessary to resort to evolutionary-biology explanations for that.

When I use voice to set my alarm, it's usually because my phone isn't in my hand. Maybe it's across the room from me. And speaking to it is more efficient than walking over to it, picking it up, and navigating to the alarm-setting UI. A voice command is a more streamlined UI for that specific task than a GUI is.

I don't think that example says much about chatbots, really, because the value is mostly the hands-free aspect, not the speak-it-in-English aspect.

Re: Apps SDK

#206

Post by zmmmmm »

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #202

Glad to see no AGI hubris in this presentation, but we also haven’t see anything groundbreaking: their own version of GUI plugins, their own version of a workflow builder, and an aspiration to take cut of every transaction on the web. I hope their GUI integration will be eventually superseded by native UI integration. I remember such well thought out concepts dating back to 2018 ( https://uxdesign.cc/redesigning-siri…

AGI is so last year. Now it's all ASI which is great because it was achieved in like 1968 or something so nobody trying to achieve it can possibly fail

Re: Apps SDK

#207

Post by ecosystem »

gapeslape wrote: post #146
fidotron wrote: post #50

This conception makes sense iff you believe in ChatGPT as the universal user interface of the future. If anything the agentic wave is showing that the chat interfaces are better off hidden behind stricter user interface paradigms.

I agree with what you are saying. I’m building a tool that helps you solve any type of questionnaire ( https://requestf.com ) and I just can’t imagine how I could leverage Apps. It would be awesome to get the distribution, but it has to also make sense from the UX perspective.

Your link is broken?

Re: Apps SDK

#208

Post by array_key_first »

anal_reactor wrote: post #194
freehorse wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an alarm, there is only one parameter to set. In more complex tasks, chat is a bad ui because it does not scale well and it does not offer good ways to arrange information. Eg if I want to buy something and I have a bunch of constraints, I would rather use a search-based UI where i can fast tweak these constraints and decide. Chathpt being smart or not here is irrelevant, it would just be bad ui for the task.

You're thinking in wrong categories. Suppose you want to buy a table. You could say "I'm looking for a €400 100x200cm table, black" and these are your search criteria. But that's not what you actually want. What you actually want is a table that fits your use case and looks nice and doesn't cost much, and "€400 100x200cm table, black" is a discrete approximation of your initial fuzzy search. A chatbot could talk to y…

The thing is that "€400 100x200cm table, black" is just much faster to input and validate versus a salesperson, be it a chatbot or an actual person.

Also, the chatbot is just not going to have enough context, at least not in it's current state. Why those measurements? Because that's how much room you have, you measured. Why black? Because your couch is black too (bad choice), and you're trying to do a theme.

That's kind of a lot to explain.

Re: Apps SDK

#209

Post by mark_l_watson »

fidotron wrote: post #50

This conception makes sense iff you believe in ChatGPT as the universal user interface of the future. If anything the agentic wave is showing that the chat interfaces are better off hidden behind stricter user interface paradigms.

I agree with you. I think chat interfaces are really good with voice interfaces while walking, asking for a foreign language lesson, effectively doing a web search while walking by speaking and listening to the answer.

Other app-like interfaces like NotebookLM can be useful, for me one or two real uses a week.

Then there is engineering small open models into larger systems to do structured data extraction, etc.

I am skeptical about the current utility of agentic systems, MCP, etc. - even though I like to experiment.

Someone else said that at least the didn’t go on and on about AGI today - a nice thing. FOMO chasing ASI and AGI will drive us bankrupt, and produce some useful results.

Re: Apps SDK

#210

Post by array_key_first »

fragmede wrote: post #119
neutronicus wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chatting with an AI to play a song whose title you know, sure. Getting an AI to play "that song that goes hmm hmmm hmmm hmmm ... uh, it was in some commercials when I was a kid" tho

more abstract than that, "I'm throwing a wedding/funeral/startup IPO/Halloween/birthday party for a whatever year old and need appropriate music". Or, without knowing specific bands, "I want to hear some 80's metal music". "more cowbell!"

You don't need AI for this, Spotify has, like, infinite playlists.

Also their playlists are made by real people (mostly...), so they don't completely suck ass.

Post reply on HN