Login
You're viewing the front-end.social public feed.
  • Raghav Agrawalimpactology@mastodon.social
    Apr 7, 2026, 4:42 PM

    Everything that affords human control over an activity predictably is design, like that which makes it possible for human mind and body, within its comfortable limits to take action is design's domain I think, not engineering or sciences.

    The latter via the built environment, objects, technology help create a repeatable function but it's design that helps humans to control it predictably.

    Which is why I think LLMs haven't been designed yet, only engineered.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0

Replies

  • Raghav Agrawalimpactology@mastodon.social
    Apr 7, 2026, 4:51 PM

    If a technology and it's control surface is so unpredictable that using it every time gives you anxiety over when it will break or what it will break it has failed to afford the basic use of technology : predictable comfort

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Raghav Agrawalimpactology@mastodon.social
    Apr 7, 2026, 4:55 PM

    Engineering can make a system work, but design is what makes it work for a human, within their cognitive bandwidth, emotional tolerance and need for predictability.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Raghav Agrawalimpactology@mastodon.social
    Apr 7, 2026, 5:01 PM

    One exception to tech that violates predictable comfort : musical instruments

    It has managed unpredictability. For example a jazz instrument is unpredictable in output, but its control surface : keys, strings is highly legible.

    Even there the uncertainty is contained, not chaotic.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Raghav Agrawalimpactology@mastodon.social
    Apr 7, 2026, 5:09 PM

    The least that an LLM interface should have to even qualify it's designed, is to make the user know it's failing predictably

    Like if you assume its going to fuck up, atleast have it limited to fucking up in only xyz ways so the user has a way to ration their time and energy to steer it.

    Designing predictable failure modes in LLMs

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0