Dr. Dave Gilbert · 30 years of situated UX research

Once software starts acting for you, one question matters: who are you talking to?

Everyone agrees agents will collaborate to run your software; the consensus hides them behind one assistant. My bet is the opposite: brands and services present as themselves, accountable, in one conversation with you — across your device, your home, your work.

Two probes of that bet are live now: Suminar and Mem·Sum.

Today's answer is a ventriloquist — one voice performing many hidden principals. The better answer is a conversation where every voice has an owner you can name — one you can see, question, and hold to account.


The bet

One assistant, or the conversation?

The consensus model hides a multi-agent system behind the scenes and puts a single assistant in front: the sub-agents do the work, the assistant speaks for them, and you only ever talk to it. The bet here is the opposite — that the agents worth trusting are the ones you can address yourself: service and brand agents present as themselves, accountable for what they say, in one conversation with you and with each other.

The Forum — the architecture, in full →

ONE ASSISTANTthe assistantyouone voice; no one else you can addressTHE CONVERSATIONyouhotelairlineyour assistant
The bet, drawn: one voice in front of agents you can't address — or named agents in one conversation, talking to you and to each other.
The bet, shipped

Three probes into computing after the app

I didn't stop at the argument. The ·Sum family is a set of small products probing three dimensions of what computing looks like once the app is displaced by the chatbot. What you read: Suminar (live, in beta) turns scholarly sources into named participants in the chat you already use. What you remember together: Mem·Sum (live, in beta) is shared memory for one to five people, reached through the assistants they already use. What you send: Mail·Sum (under construction) is a real email address feeding an owner-confirmed private Sum. This site is called After the App for a reason — this is what after the app looks like.

The products are also how I do UX research now: build the thing, put it in people's hands free, and learn from what they choose to share. The operator surface is content-blind by construction, so the beta learns only what users volunteer. The argument ships, and the shipping argues back (the case study).

The Companion — the family's signature surface — beside Claude. Left: Mem·Sum, where [[Our Cats]] #dave-lisa cites an exact page in plain chat. Right: Suminar's Shelf of source agents — the screenshot in which the host, unscripted, declined to paraphrase a source. Click or tap either to view full screen; the full story is The Companion.

Three arenas where it plays out

Same shape everywhere — a conversation of agents you can address directly, not a single assistant. These are the three concrete places it lands.

The Individual

You, as yourself, meeting the world's brands and services in the open — across every surface you use, web and apps alike.

Enter →

The Home

AI as domestic infrastructure — household administration handled by a configured appliance, not a chat toy or a butler.

Enter →

The Workplace

Agents inside the organization: the forum architecture deployed at work, with visible roles and accountable handoffs.

Enter →

Start here

Three refusals, one argument — the triptych at the front of the spine.

The spine · Essay

Against the Everything Assistant

One voice that sees and does everything is the wrong dream. Point at the thing; land in a room that remembers; let named services act and tell the truth about it.

The spine · Essay

Against the Middleman: Why Agents Should Speak to You Directly

Why the future isn't a hidden swarm behind one assistant, but branded agents that join the conversation as themselves.

The spine · Essay

Who Are You Talking To?

The ventriloquist problem: when one assistant speaks for many hidden brands, you can no longer tell whose voice you are hearing — or who benefits.

All the essays, newest first, with reading paths →

The practice behind the essays

Thirty years of one question

None of this is a pundit's bet. These essays are the latest application of a research practice held steady since 1995 — from a conversation-analytic study of an early agent-based PDA, through museum galleries, retail aisles, and an aging-in-place startup, to instrumented research on today's AI. One lens throughout: how people make sense of, break down with, and repair their understanding of intelligent machines. The case studies carry the primary evidence — the 1995 transcripts, the research programs, the shipped decks. And lately the practice ships: the Sum family above runs the same method as live products.

Read the practice →

The vocabulary, mapped

A connected system of concepts

The work is the conceptual apparatus — named, interlinked, and usable. Every term is defined and linked to where it is argued.

Open the concept map →