{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreifd76e4r6h3v7mfrcqw4p4fphiayuosala7sobkk4ivqwgi6eokhy",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:c4uo5im4kb23i76qndr43xi2/app.bsky.feed.post/3meop5wavhov2"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreickgxuzzzx7bzdb2omjzsyq7fdi3a57tczbdik7nhb63zv3wfmoce"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/webp",
    "size": 297988
  },
  "path": "/links/convenience-at-our-doorstep",
  "publishedAt": "2026-02-12T05:00:00.000Z",
  "site": "https://jonathanstephens.us",
  "tags": [
    "Generative Ai",
    "Layoff",
    "Design",
    "Research",
    "Amazon (company)",
    "Vibe Coding",
    "Thoughtfulness",
    "Intentionality",
    "Ux Research",
    "Rigor",
    "Company Culture",
    "Question-asking"
  ],
  "textContent": "> I’m a UX researcher. My entire practice is built on the premise that you can’t think your way to understanding in isolation. You have to get outside your own head, test your assumptions against other peoples’ reality. The work should be shaped by perspectives you didn’t anticipate, and usually can’t. Instead, I was in my basement, in a closed loop with an AI, iterating on an idea that no other human saw. The evolution of the concept lives entirely in a conversation between me and my buddy Claude. Nobody else is in the room to say “Wait, what about?” — or “Dude, no!” or even the dreaded but imperative occasional “Yikes, that’s ridiculous.”\n\n> What frustrated me wasn’t that engineers were building. The new possibilities here are full-stop sparkling. It was that too many aren’t asking whether what we’re building should exist at all. Too many take an idea at face value and build it. Then they demo it to the people the thing was ostensibly designed for and say the UI isn’t quite there yet — as though the UI were the only thing that wasn’t there yet. And those people nod, because that’s how all this works.\n\n> This is what building without rigor does. It commits resources without discernment and it narrows what anyone is able to imagine. This way of working locks people into a deterministic future, and we haven’t even skimmed the surface of possibility.\n\n> In the middle of the largest technological transformation most of us will live through, the people whose job was to ask does this actually work for humans are the ones being let go. The questions still matter — arguably more than anything else — but the system decided the questions were slowing things down. And so the roles that exist to represent the person on the other end of the product are treated as friction to be eliminated.",
  "title": "Convenience at Our Doorstep"
}