 |
Discussing Stupid: A byte-sized podcast on stupid UXAuthor: High Monkey
Discussing Stupid returns to the airwaves to transform digital facepalms into teachable momentsall in the time it takes to enjoy your coffee break! Sponsored by High Monkey, this podcast dives into stupid practices across websites and Microsoft collaboration tools, among other digital realms. Our "byte-sized" bi-weekly episodes are packed with expert insights and a healthy dose of humor. Discussions focus on five key areas: Business Process & Collaboration, UX/IA, Inclusive Design, Content & Search, and Performance & SEO. Join us and lets start making the digital world a bit less stupid, one episode at a time. Visit our website at https://www.discussingstupid.com Language: en Genres: Business, Marketing, Technology Contact email: Get it Feed URL: Get it iTunes ID: Get it |
Listen Now...
S3E8 - Intentional AI: The real value of AI wireframes is NOT the wireframes
Episode 8
Wednesday, 28 January, 2026
In Episode 8 of the Intentional AI series, Cole, Virgil, and Chad explore one of the most tempting uses of AI in digital work: wireframing and page layout. With AI now able to generate full wireframes in minutes or even seconds, the promise of speed is undeniable. But speed alone is not the point.The conversation focuses on where AI genuinely helps in the wireframing process and where it introduces new risks. Wireframes are meant to establish structure, hierarchy, and intent, not just visual output. While AI can quickly generate layouts, components, and patterns, it still requires strong human judgment to evaluate what is correct, what is missing, and what could cause problems downstream.A key theme of the episode is escalation of responsibility. As AI reduces the time required to create wireframes, the importance of human review, direction, and decision making increases. Treating AI generated wireframes as finished work can introduce serious risks, especially around accessibility, content fidelity, maintainability, and overall project direction.Virgil shares an experiment where he used AI to first generate a detailed prompt for wireframing, then tested that prompt across three tools: Claude, Google Gemini 3, and Figma Make. The results reveal clear differences in layout quality, accessibility handling, content retention, and how easily the outputs could be integrated into real workflows.Claude produced the strongest layout and structural patterns but failed badly on accessibility and removed large portions of content. Gemini generated simpler wireframes with clearer structure, but used even less content and still struggled with accessibility. Figma Make stood out for workflow integration, retaining all content and allowing direct editing inside Figma, though it also failed accessibility requirements and relied heavily on generic styling and placeholder imagery.Throughout the episode, the group returns to the same conclusion. AI is extremely effective at getting the first portion of wireframing done quickly. It is far less effective at making judgment calls, enforcing standards, or understanding context without guidance.In this episode, they explore:How wireframing fits into the content lifecycleWhy speed changes the risk profile of design workUsing AI to generate prompts instead of starting from scratchWhere AI wireframes succeed and where they failAccessibility and content risks in AI generated layoutsA wireframing comparison of Claude, Gemini 3, and Figma MakeA downloadable Episode Companion Guide is available below with tool comparisons and key takeaways.DS-S3-E8-CompanionDoc.pdfPreviously in the Intentional AI series:Episode 1: Intentional AI and the Content LifecycleEpisode 2: Maximizing AI for Research & AnalysisEpisode 3: Smarter Content Creation with AIEpisode 4: The role of AI in content managementEpisode 5: How much can you trust AI for...
