> Dumb things start to happen when you try to build Star Trek interfaces. When you build DWIM interfaces in real life, they are annoying and trigger unwanted and the implementation is without exception, by necessity, a growing ball of spaghetti.

This is what I'm talking about.

"Growing ball of spaghetti" happens because system cannot recognize intent. That problem, itself, was something most engineering teams still seem to fail to recognize.

Automated doors are my favorite example, because the "simple solution" is ubiquitous and wrong and we got used to it, and complex solution is usually leading people the wrong path. In short:

Current doors: if(user triggers proximity detector) { open(); }

Failed attempt at DWIM: if(user triggers proximity detector && this && not that && except when ...) { open(); }

Star Trek: if(user intends to walk through the door) { open(); }

LLMs are the first tool we have that allow us to infer user intent directly, and use that as an input.

And recognizing intent itself cannot be done with a single sensor. It requires both general understanding of how humans behave, and awareness of surrounding and subjects - their movements and behavior, as well as who/what they are, and what they are doing.