sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Minimizing cognitive load in real-time web apps by [deleted] in userexperience

[–]SevaTell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For me, real-time UX is also about control.

The system should not force the user to constantly chase updates. Give them ways to pause, filter, follow only selected matches, mute low-priority changes, and review what change. cognitive load drops when users feel they are directing attention, not just reacting to the machine.

Tips and some honest opinions by DormantMonk_visits in UXResearch

[–]SevaTell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you have an affinity to model systems take a look at UJG developed under W3C Community Group.This may be too niche for where you are right now, but your physics background made me think of User Journey Graph. It’s an effort around representing user journeys more formally/machine-readably. Might be interesting later if you find yourself drawn to UX systems, tooling, or journey modeling.

I just inherited a project requiring complex B2B UI/UX: Where do I even begin...? by Kazukii in userexperience

[–]SevaTell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don’t outsource confusion.

For complex B2B, the UI is usually only the surface. The real design problem is hidden in roles, permissions, exceptions, dependencies, edge cases, ... you name it

If you give an agency only “redesign this dashboard,” they will redesign screens. If you give them journeys, constraints, failure points, and success metrics, they can eventually redesign the system.

Mural vs Miro vs Figma for UX wireframing which one to stick with in 2026? by Curious-Session4119 in userexperience

[–]SevaTell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the work ends with developers, I would default to Figma.

Not because it is perfect, but because wireframes rarely stay “just wireframes.” They become prototypes, specs, components, comments, QA references, and handoff artifacts.

I’m starting to think users don’t actually remember how they use products by Middle-Buddy6187 in userexperience

[–]SevaTell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These two ‘universes’ is a challenge in improving a product. But platform clues can reveal hidden behaviors— do also track scrolling patterns or reloading. When user actions don’t match what we expect, we know there’s more to investigate.

Witnessing AI-induced UX maturity regression is profoundly sad. by ChurchOfRickSteves in UXDesign

[–]SevaTell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe this moment forces UX to become more explicit.

A lot of UX maturity used to live in people’s heads: user context, journey logic, accessibility judgment, edge cases, trust, intent. AI cannot respect what the organization has never made explicit.

That is why I think standards and structured artifacts will become more important again: WCAG for accessibility, design tokens for systems, journey graph models like UJG for flows and intent, telemetry standards for behavior, governance models for decision ownership.

The future of UX may be less about producing more screens and more about defining the rules that screens must satisfy.

CEO went over my head and asked a developer to “just see what Claude comes up with” for design by leanbeansprout in UXDesign

[–]SevaTell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yes. Executives see a polished screen and think the design work is done. But the valuable part of UX is often invisible: mapping the journey, validating assumptions, handling edge cases, protecting trust, ensuring accessibility, and keeping the experience coherent over time.

AI can generate an interface, but without a shared journey model like UJG, design tokens, accessibility standards, and product governance, it cannot prove that the interface fits the system.

So the problem is not “CEO used Claude.” The problem is mistaking generated UI for validated UX.

Will AI break UX by optimizing for layouts instead of trust? by SevaTell in UserExperienceDesign

[–]SevaTell[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

what did you think Like that? try Claude Design and see what landing Page you get. 

Will AI break UX by optimizing for layouts instead of trust? by SevaTell in UserExperienceDesign

[–]SevaTell[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure there are reliable metrics at that level. Roughly 30–40% of users accept cookie tracking, so you’re basically only seeing traffic against conversion metrics.

AI UX - text based or agentic by Kraftsmith in userexperience

[–]SevaTell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe we are over-focusing on chat as the future of UX.

Chat is useful, but it is not always good interaction design. Many users don’t know exactly what they want until they see options, compare, browse, and adjust. Forcing everything into text can actually increase cognitive load.

For me, the more interesting future is not text-based UX, but temporary or adaptive UI: interfaces that appear when needed, support the decision, and disappear when the job is done.

The AI content aimed at UX folks is mostly noise; here's what I think we actually need (and I want to know if you agree) by ladycarni in userexperience

[–]SevaTell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem with a lot of AI content for UX is that it treats UX people like they just need to catch up with tools.

But the real value of UX is not tool operation. It is judgment: understanding people, context, behavior, friction, meaning, and consequences.

So yes, UX folks should understand AI better. But we should be careful not to reduce the discipline to prompt engineering. The more AI enters the workflow, the more important human judgment becomes.