
ИИ рядом с заметками
Copilot writes functions, Claude generates modules, Cursor assembles apps. Meanwhile, developers spend days figuring out what to build. Here's how this shift changes the profession.
Wrote perfect code — but users can't figure out the interface
You're debating how to implement a feature, but not whether it's needed at all
AI generates code in minutes — but you spend days figuring out what to build
Lead writes a spec → developer implements → user is unhappy. Cycle repeats
Three shifts
When AI writes code in minutes, the skill of 'writing clean functions' loses market value. That doesn't mean it's not needed — but it's no longer a competitive advantage. Like knowing how to drive: important, but not what defines a profession.
Three shifts are happening. From features to value: instead of 'how to implement' — 'why does the user need this'. From specs to understanding: instead of 'build per spec' — 'understand what's behind it'. From coder to product engineer: the person who understands both users and systems becomes indispensable.
Example: the task is 'fix the folder hierarchy'. A coder sees a spec for dragging and dropping elements. A product engineer asks: who creates these folders? How many nesting levels do people actually use? What happens when there are 200 folders? This isn't a spec — it's a challenge to think through scenarios.
LiveAI — for product thinking
LiveAI is where developers keep notes about users, scenarios, and decisions. AI sees this context and helps find blind spots in UX.
User notes + AI context — ask 'where will the user get confused?' and get a specific answer
ADRs in notebooks — architectural decisions as context for AI. A new developer asks 'why this way?' — AI answers
Iterative critique — describe a feature, ask AI to critique the UX, refine, repeat
Workflow: Think through a feature before writing code
Write down what you know about the feature: why it's needed, who it's for, what the use cases are.
AI sees the feature context and can raise questions you haven't asked.
Based on AI's responses, write down 3-5 key scenarios. This becomes the foundation for design.
AI sees the scenarios and context — and can critique UX with specifics.
Write down the decision and reasoning. This is an ADR (Architecture Decision Record) — memory for AI and for the team.
Workflow: UX critique through AI
Write down how the current interface works: what users see, what actions are available, where problems arise.
AI sees the UX description and user complaints — and can suggest concrete improvements.
With context vs without
Without user notes, AI gives generic advice. With context — it critiques a specific scenario.
AI sees scenarios, user complaints, ADRs. Critique is specific: 'Your approach breaks at 20 projects because...'
'We recommend conducting UX research and A/B testing' — generic words you already know.
FAQ
Describe a feature in a notebook, ask AI to critique the UX. 12 minutes — and you have scenarios and an ADR, not just a spec.