Learning Library

← Back to Library

Intelligent Pixels: From Durable UI to Disposable Interfaces

Key Points

  • The industry is moving from “product as an interface bundle” to treating the product as a durable substrate where individual pixels become cheap, disposable elements.
  • Nano Banana Pro is cited as the tipping‑point catalyst that demonstrates how generative and agentic technologies can make pixels inexpensive and context‑aware, heralding a new wave of intelligent displays.
  • For the past four decades, coherent interfaces were an economic hack—expensive design, QA, localization, and training forced organizations to build long‑lived, shared UIs (e.g., the infamous Oracle Eye Store) and invest heavily in certifications and change‑management.
  • Recent advances in generative AI have shattered that cost barrier, allowing pixels to be generated on‑the‑fly, which makes static, one‑size‑fits‑all interfaces obsolete.
  • This paradigm shift will reshape software strategies, influencing decisions about building vs. buying tools and how talent is allocated across design, development, and AI‑driven personalization.

Sections

Full Transcript

# Intelligent Pixels: From Durable UI to Disposable Interfaces **Source:** [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA) **Duration:** 00:26:14 ## Summary - The industry is moving from “product as an interface bundle” to treating the product as a durable substrate where individual pixels become cheap, disposable elements. - Nano Banana Pro is cited as the tipping‑point catalyst that demonstrates how generative and agentic technologies can make pixels inexpensive and context‑aware, heralding a new wave of intelligent displays. - For the past four decades, coherent interfaces were an economic hack—expensive design, QA, localization, and training forced organizations to build long‑lived, shared UIs (e.g., the infamous Oracle Eye Store) and invest heavily in certifications and change‑management. - Recent advances in generative AI have shattered that cost barrier, allowing pixels to be generated on‑the‑fly, which makes static, one‑size‑fits‑all interfaces obsolete. - This paradigm shift will reshape software strategies, influencing decisions about building vs. buying tools and how talent is allocated across design, development, and AI‑driven personalization. ## Sections - [00:00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA&t=0s) **Rethinking Interfaces with Intelligent Pixels** - The briefing explains how the emergence of technologies like Nano Banana Pro is driving a shift from treating user interfaces as scarce, shared bundles to viewing products as durable substrates with disposable pixels, and outlines the resulting software‑build, buy, and talent‑allocation strategies while debunking the myth that coherent interfaces are a natural law. - [00:03:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA&t=193s) **Rise of Ephemeral Generative UI** - The speaker outlines how cheap, disposable interfaces and AI‑driven, context‑aware UI panels are proliferating, prompting a new design language and agents that autonomously generate and manipulate software components. - [00:07:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA&t=472s) **Agentic Layer & Intent Pixels** - The speaker describes how AI agents (layer 2) automate tasks across CRM, data warehouses, and other back‑office systems, while UI elements (layer 3 “pixels”) are generated only as compiled intent when human judgment is needed. - [00:11:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA&t=688s) **Composable Interfaces vs Disposable Pixels** - The speaker contrasts traditional, high‑traffic web pages with emerging on‑the‑fly, agent‑driven UI components, emphasizing traffic decay, risk to low‑traffic pages, and the shift to highly composable “disposable pixel” interfaces that can be created in seconds rather than months. - [00:18:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA&t=1103s) **Redefining Roles in Generative UI** - The passage outlines how designers, product managers, and front‑end engineers must shift from crafting static screens to defining interface grammars, intent specifications, and safe, composable shells that support generative UI systems. - [00:21:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA&t=1298s) **Slack's Evolving Role in Generative UI** - The speaker argues that Slack’s stable collaboration platform is becoming a hub for generative‑UI agents and plug‑ins—allowing standardized workflow shells alongside flexible, disposable UI elements—demonstrating that traditional B2B SaaS can coexist with emerging generative interfaces. - [00:25:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-01UrScIrA&t=1501s) **Rise of Agent-Addressable Interfaces** - As data needs expand beyond analysts, products that are agent‑addressable, schema‑clean, and composable will dominate, while monolithic UI‑centric solutions lose relevance to agents that let users pick their own interfaces, reshaping both consumer and business experiences. ## Full Transcript
0:00This week's executive briefing is all 0:02about the future of intelligent pixels. 0:05We're moving from product as an 0:07interface bundle to product as a durable 0:10substrate with pixels as throwaway. And 0:13I want to dig into what that means. And 0:15yes, the catalyst for this is Nano 0:17Banana Pro and the transformation it has 0:19brought to the way we think about 0:20images. But I look at Nano Banana Pro as 0:23really the tip of the spear. I'm not 0:25interested in whether you think this 0:27particular model is I'm interested in 0:29this as a tipping point and we'll see 0:31more models that are even better than 0:32this in the future. So what does that 0:34mean for our software strategies? So I 0:37want to break this into a few moves and 0:39we're going to go through them one by 0:40one and by the end I think you're going 0:42to see where we're ending up from a 0:44software build perspective, from a 0:45software buy perspective, even from a 0:48talent allocation perspective. So let's 0:49jump into it. Number one, coherent 0:52interfaces were an economic hack, not 0:55necessarily a law of nature. For 40 0:57years, we treated user interfaces as 1:00scarce because they were expensive to 1:02design, they were expensive to build, 1:04they were expensive to QA, to localize, 1:06to document, to train on. I still 1:08remember the days of onprem in the 1:11basement Oracle servers, right? Like 1:13that's the world we live in where 1:14software and hardware were both very 1:16expensive and that meant when you got an 1:18interface it had to be shared and serve 1:20thousands and millions of users and use 1:22cases. I used Oracle eyes store. Oracle 1:25eyes store sorry to anyone out there 1:27who's from Oracle is a terrible terrible 1:29terrible interface. It is absolutely 1:32awful. I have deleted half a store 1:35because of Oracle is store's terrible 1:38interface, but it had to be shared by 1:40thousands and millions of users and my 1:42preferences didn't matter. Interfaces 1:44had to be durable. You had to amortize 1:46the design and development cost for 1:48years. So, Oracle Eyes Store stayed the 1:49same for a long long time because no one 1:52wanted to change it and Larry could keep 1:54making money. So, that meant we 1:56optimized our organizational structures 1:58around coherent and longlived 2:01interfaces. So we would have opinionated 2:05interaction design. We would have 2:06navigation. We would have page layouts 2:09that had very clear mental models 2:11embedded. We had training. We had 2:12certifications. Has anyone ever been 2:14Salesforce certified? Has anyone been 2:16Workday certified? Anyone certified in 2:18how to use Jira? This is what I mean. 2:21This also meant there was huge change 2:23management overhead for any major UI 2:26shift. that made sense when every pixel 2:30essentially had to be handtoled. That is 2:33no longer true. And we need to recognize 2:36that this moment, this 2, 3 week period, 2:39this is the tipping point. We've seen 2:41signs of it before, but this is the 2:43moment it all changed. Generative and 2:45agentic waves are making pixels cheap 2:48and contextual, and we just hit that 2:51tipping point in the last couple weeks. 2:53You have three overlapping shifts 2:55happening at once and reinforcing each 2:57other to drive this tip. First, 2:59generative user interfaces are models 3:01that can spit out full screens from text 3:04or context. You have UISard, Vzero, 3:08Galileo. They already generate 3:09multis-creen mock-ups from prompts. 3:11Neielson has talked about this as the 3:13dawn of cheap disposable UI. I don't 3:16care how far down the hype train you go. 3:19I think the key is to recognize that 3:22ephemeral user interfaces are popping up 3:24everywhere because they kind of in fact 3:28there's this entire startup called Wabby 3:30that just allows you to make generative 3:32interfaces and software for yourself now 3:34as a personal consumer. You can have 3:36generative interfaces and comet 3:38generative interfaces in other smart 3:40browsers. So you have generative UI 3:42becoming a thing. Number two, ephemeral 3:45and generative UI concepts are 3:47exploding. And so there's a growing 3:50conversation around what hyper 3:52contextual applications or panels might 3:54look like and how we might create and 3:56destroy them and keep the application 3:58state the same. That is different from 4:00the technology itself. So generative UI 4:02is about the technology and user 4:03interface. The idea of UI concepts 4:06really the design language is growing 4:08and we need a new design language for 4:10this this change we're all going 4:12through. The third trend is agentic 4:14software that drives other software. 4:16This is actually funny enough where Nano 4:18Banana Pro I think rightly comes in. 4:21Google smartly placed their image 4:23generator right out of the gate on an 4:26API so that agents can call it and come 4:29back with images. People who are 4:32enterprising are already using this for 4:35interface design from Nano Banana Pro. I 4:38am not talking about theory. I'm talking 4:40about what I actually see on X on Reddit 4:42other places with screenshots with 4:44videos. People are using the API call to 4:48pass a string of data in a structured 4:51prompt query to NanoBanana Pro and 4:54retrieve a chart or a graph that they 4:57can then display as the past week's 5:00sales, the past days customers, whatever 5:03it is that they need for internal 5:04metrics, they can just automatically 5:06query and get a nice chart back from 5:08Nano Banana Pro. That is generative 5:11interface driven by Aentic software. 5:14Fundamentally, the interface is 5:15something that is starting to morph 5:17based on user context and it isn't 5:20staying fixed anymore. So, if you put 5:22that together with the idea of throwaway 5:25pixels, fundamentally, you have software 5:27that's changing in value. Software is 5:30becoming generated on demand from intent 5:32and context. It's becoming private to 5:35the user in the moment for that 5:37particular ask. It's becoming discarded 5:39when that moment passes. One of the most 5:41instructive descriptions of vibecoded 5:44apps has been a recognition from folks 5:46who've done this over 20 30 projects 5:49that they are finding that these apps 5:51are valuable in the moment and some of 5:53them they may use again but some of them 5:55they created just for a single use and 5:56that was worth it to them. So Nano 5:58Banana Pro is basically a futureleaning 6:01version of this. A model that 6:03understands UI structures, sketches, 6:05diagrams, and it flows well enough that 6:07UI just becomes one more output modality 6:10like text or code. That's your 6:11disposable pixels. Before I get too far 6:14down the road, I don't want you to walk 6:15away at this point and think Nate thinks 6:18software is dead or Nate thinks that 6:21software won't exist anymore. That's not 6:23true. I think the opposite. But I do 6:25want to actually talk through what this 6:27means because I think software is going 6:29to profoundly change. So let's look at 6:32what disposable pixels actually look 6:34like in practice. I want to call out 6:36three layers. Layer number one is the 6:39system of record or the system of 6:41decisioning. So in this sense the things 6:44that B2B SAS was good at, they don't 6:46die. They just move downward in the 6:48stack. So data models, workflows, 6:51permissions, audits, compliance, things 6:54that we paid for when we purchased the 6:56software, things that we pitched when we 6:59wanted to be entrepreneurs and make 7:00money off of building stuff. It was this 7:02hard stuff, right? That's moving down 7:04the stack. Domain logic, forecasting, 7:06pricing engines, how you handle uh 7:09interconnects, APIs, and web hooks. This 7:12layer, frankly, is durable. It isn't 7:14going anywhere. Nano Banana Pro is not 7:17taking that away and neither is any 7:19other image generator. It is very valued 7:22dense. It's where Moes live. It's why 7:24I'm not super worried about Salesforce 7:26for the medium to long term. Layer 7:28number two above that system of record 7:32is intent planning and operation. And 7:35this is the layer that interprets it 7:37says show me if you say show me which 7:39enterprise customers in AMIA have 7:41renewal risk this quarter and give me a 7:44CSM touch gap no longer than 45 days and 7:47then please draft an outreach email. 7:49That's a series of tasks that an AI 7:52agent can pick up pass off to other AI 7:55agents and start to execute against the 7:57system of record. Layer two is becoming 8:00an agentic layer. It's not all the way 8:02there yet, but I don't know anyone who 8:05operates a B2B SAS company that isn't 8:08working on some version of layer 2. And 8:11in fact, most businesses are working on 8:13some version of layer 2 for their back 8:15office operation because this kind of 8:18experience is what we have all wanted 8:21software to be and we never got a 8:23chance. If you remember back when I said 8:24software was something we had to conform 8:26to, we never really wanted that. We 8:29wanted software to be more personal and 8:31with an agentic layer over the top of a 8:33solid data foundation, we finally have 8:36that chance. So that means the agent can 8:38hit your CRM, it can hit your customer 8:40data warehouse, it can run the queries, 8:42it can call the email system, the 8:43ticketing system, it can decide what 8:46needs a UI and what ought to be 8:48autoexecuted. All of that can happen and 8:51then you can finally get to the UX. 8:55Layer three is pixels, but not pixels as 8:58the handtoled crafted objects that we 9:02had to live with back in the Oracle eyes 9:04store days. I mean pixels as a compiled 9:07artifact of intent. So only only when it 9:10needs your judgment does the system 9:13compile pixels in this model. It might 9:15be a one-off panel, right? It may have a 9:17rank table of atrisisk customers. It 9:19might have an inline suggested outreach. 9:21It might have a toggle for send now 9:23schedule and design. And it's a 9:25transient visualization. It's a specific 9:27cohort ch cohort chart or funnel for 9:31this question only and a narrow editor 9:34UI for exactly one structured decision. 9:37In other words, we are moving to a world 9:39where at least some of the UI does not 9:43generalize. I am not trying to suggest 9:46that all of the UI is going to be 9:48composable. And part of why I'm not is 9:50that we are creatures of habit. We have 9:52a lot of assumptions around how UI ought 9:56to look and we do get used to our 9:58software products pretty quickly and we 10:00don't like it when they change. I think 10:02there are going to be common cores in 10:05our software stacks that remain durable 10:09even if they're UI. Think of it as the 10:12homepage for a B2B SAS that shows you 10:16customer conversations and you want that 10:18homepage to be easily navigable and you 10:20don't want it to be new and different. I 10:21think that kind of UI is here to stay. 10:24It's not going to be AIdriven. I think 10:26the key is that there are going to be a 10:28whole new class of user interfaces that 10:31nest under that that are going to be 10:34heavily used that are generative that 10:36are throwaway that are rendered at 10:39runtime for that particular person. We 10:42are arguably already doing this when we 10:44create an interface on the fly through 10:46perplexity and then share that throwaway 10:49interface with one or two other people 10:51as a way of talking about a topic. We're 10:53starting to do it in chat GPT when we 10:55have shared conversations and chat GPT 10:57creates an artifact that we both view 10:59together. So interfaces are becoming 11:02this sort of twoclass object where you 11:05have durable permanent interfaces that 11:07may be a common core that has high habit 11:10that is the front door of the 11:12application and this disposable layer 11:14that sort of makes up for a lot of the 11:16pages that were handtoled before that 11:19never got a lot of traffic. Anyone who 11:21has managed a SAS application will tell 11:23you that traffic decays stochastically. 11:26Traffic decays like this on an 11:28exponential curve and your top two or 11:30three pages account for most of your 11:32traffic. But you have to put just as 11:33much work into all these other pages 11:35that only a couple of people want. Those 11:37are the pages that I think are largely 11:40at risk during this transition. We are 11:42going to see SAS applications that only 11:45have two or three main pages and 11:48everything else may be generated for the 11:50user on the fly. Sure, the user may be 11:52able to save it in some place so they 11:54can come back to it if they like that 11:55particular view, but fundamentally 11:58they're going to be much more composable 11:59than and that brings me, I think, to a 12:02chance to talk about the differences 12:04here because I want to be really clear 12:06about how different a coherent 12:09consistent handtoled interface is versus 12:11a disposable pixel pixel interface. If 12:14you want to lay that out and talk about 12:17different horizons and axes of value, 12:19they could not be more different. The 12:22time horizon for a traditional interface 12:24is measured in months at best. And for 12:26disposable pixels, it can be done in 12:28seconds. The design target like you 12:30often have a lot of people focused on 12:32personas, roles, generalized workflows 12:34for your fancy interface. And for 12:36disposable pixels, the agent is going to 12:39decide. It's not going to be a human. 12:41the agent is going to put a user, a 12:43moment, and a goal together and go 12:45somewhere. Your mental model for a 12:47coherent interface app is learn this 12:50app. And I think that is actually one I 12:52would really like to emphasize from a 12:54talent perspective. Most of the talent 12:56at tech companies and at non- tech 12:58companies still has the mental model of 13:01learn this app and they've brought that 13:03with them to chat GPT in the AI era. 13:06that does not serve you because the 13:09world we're moving to with disposable 13:11pixels is more like what AI actually is. 13:14State your intent, do the prompt, and UI 13:17appears when needed. And that could not 13:20be more different than assuming that the 13:22app is static and you can learn it. And 13:24I think so much of the time we assume 13:26that the cost structure, I've called 13:28this out, it's so different. Instead of 13:30a heavy upfront cost for traditional 13:32software, disposable pixels, they have 13:34heavy model training, but the pixels are 13:36functionally free. The models have been 13:39paid for and you can get cheap, cheap, 13:41cheap iteration. Even Nano Banana Pro, 13:43which is relatively expensive now and 13:45will get cheaper, it's still dirt cheap, 13:47relatively speaking. The consistency is 13:50something I want to call out. This gets 13:52viewed as a concern for a lot of 13:54generative interfaces. Consistency value 13:56is obviously very high for traditional 13:58software. It is mostly inside the agent 14:01planning and the durable state and 14:04record layer. It is not in the pixels. 14:06And I think that a lot of times 14:07proponents of generative UI fail to make 14:10this connection. They tend to say that 14:12generative UI is whatever you want it to 14:14be without recognizing that it has to 14:16rest on a durable software substrate 14:19that does not change that is not 14:22ephemeral. Differentiation or how 14:24software differentiates from others is 14:26also in and of itself different. So let 14:28me explain what I mean. In the 14:30traditional software days, if you were 14:32pitching your software as VC era, we 14:35were software is better. You would call 14:36out look and feel. You would call out 14:38interaction design. You call out UX 14:40patterns. You'd call out the the smarts 14:42of the machine learning inside. You 14:43would call out the cleanness and 14:45efficiency of your workflow. The way 14:46you'd understood the problem. With 14:48disposable pixels, you call out the 14:50outcomes because the AI agents are doing 14:53more and more of the work. You would 14:54call out the speed from intent to 14:56action. And as an example of speed, it 14:59took me 10 seconds to craft a perfect 15:04chart of GDP annually in the US and 15:10Germany compared on the same chart in 15:13Nano Banana Pro from 1960 to 2025. 10 15:17seconds. You're not going to beat that 15:18with a traditional BI tool. The speed 15:21from intent to action is addictive and 15:24it is driving consumer and business 15:26behavior. And I think that we are 15:28fooling ourselves if we think anything 15:30else. Look, coherent interfaces are not 15:32going to disappear. They're just going 15:34to stop being the default shape of 15:36software. They're going to become 15:37perhaps a fallback when tasks are 15:39ambiguous. They're going to become a 15:41shared frame for multi-user 15:43collaboration. They're going to become a 15:45meta surface where you orchestrate 15:46agents. It's just going to look 15:48different. I want to go a bit deeper 15:50here on the B2B SAS side partly because 15:52I am very deep in B2B SAS myself and I 15:54think this also hits B2B SAS profoundly 15:56and I want to call that out for if 15:58you're like buying B2B SAS or if you're 16:01a leader in B2B SAS if you're a builder 16:03in B2B SAS that should cover a lot of 16:04folks. This is a big deal. So the 16:07disposable pixel story is extra 16:08complicated and I think it justifies a 16:10little sidebar here. First I want to 16:12call out that right now today a ton of 16:15the enterprise value is framed around 16:18this idea that we own the primary 16:20surface where the job happens right so 16:22CRM think that way ERPs think that way 16:25HR information systems think that way 16:27PLG analytics systems think that way if 16:30the primary interaction moves to an 16:32agent or co-pilot surface then your own 16:35UI is just a reference implementation 16:38it's not the default touch point anymore 16:40and so your API behavior behavior, your 16:42data semantics matter more than your 16:44navigation bar. So the bundling power 16:47shifts from is this the system with the 16:49best dashboard, which is what sales has 16:51sold on in B2B SAS for a really long 16:53time, to is this the system that is 16:56easiest for agents to choreograph. And I 16:59think a lot of companies don't have a 17:01good answer to this. Also means that UI 17:03is becoming a product surface that you 17:05do not fully control. If customers are 17:07using generative UI tools on top of your 17:09APIs, they are letting their own 17:12internal design systems and their own 17:14models render their own views of your 17:17data. And then your Canon UI is just one 17:19of many frontends. And so you're 17:21competing with internal task panels, 17:22with co-pilot generated micro apps, with 17:25perhaps a third party universal 17:27workspace tool that comes along. In 17:29other words, you are at risk of 17:32disintermediating the relationship 17:34because you get aggregated with many 17:36other SAS products behind one agentic 17:38interface. And so where SAS still wins 17:41is where it's able to be a substrate as 17:45a service where you own the canonical 17:47state for something, the contracts, the 17:48ledgers, the records, the risk models, 17:50whatever it is. And that means that you 17:52are embedded in domain flows that track 17:55real value. So SLAs's compliance 17:57reference data being safe and 17:59predictable for agents to call is a way 18:02to win. So if you have strong schemas, 18:04if you have good safeguards, if you have 18:06item potent item potency, say that three 18:09times fast, in a disposable pixel world, 18:11you become less of a thing with screens, 18:14which is what most software has been, 18:16and more of a high integrity service 18:18that agents and generators can rely on. 18:21Let's transition to the talent side. 18:23What happens to designers, PMs, and 18:25engineers in a world where we start to 18:28have generative UI? For designers, you 18:30have to shift the way you think, right? 18:32You're the designers on your team, the 18:33designers you hire. If you're a designer 18:35listening to this, you are moving from 18:36owning specific flows and screens pretty 18:39rapidly into defining interface 18:42grammarss, into defining constraints, 18:44into like figuring out safe snap points 18:47for generative UI. You are becoming 18:49language designers and safety engineers 18:52for human attention. If you're a PM, 18:55you're used to a world where what 18:56feature or page do we build next is the 18:58core question. You're moving to a world 19:01where what intents do we support? What 19:04state changes must be safe? What 19:06decisions need human judgment versus 19:08being fully automated? So instead of 19:11just creating a static wireframe, you're 19:13moving to a world where you're trying to 19:15spec out intent, state, and outcome 19:17loops. And that's really different. 19:19Engineers, especially front-end 19:21engineers, are used to front-end pixel 19:23pushing. And now you need to start 19:25thinking about building stable 19:27interfaces for agents and generators and 19:30a thin canonical shell. You may want to 19:32build something that enables those snap 19:34points. You may want to build something 19:35that enables validation logic. You may 19:38want to build something that enables a 19:40degree of composability within safe 19:42constraints. And so your interface 19:44backlog for for designers, PMs, and 19:46engineers begins to change here because 19:48instead of traditional tickets that come 19:50in in Jera, you have new intents that 19:52you want to support, new system 19:53behaviors, new constraints or 19:55invariants, new components or layouts 19:57the generator might use. It's not just 19:59add another settings page. Now I do want 20:01to call out there are places where 20:04coherent traditional software still 20:07wins. Cognitive mapping is a big one. So 20:10humans do like stable landmarks. I 20:11mentioned this earlier. If you are doing 20:13complex work like trading, like 20:15medicine, incident response, people rely 20:18on deep spatial memory of their tools. 20:20Completely shifting pixels every time 20:22adds cognitive load and risk. This is 20:25one of the places where I think 20:26perplexity is making an incorrect choice 20:29in the finance space. Bloomberg terminal 20:31may look like a maze to most people, but 20:34it is software that people with a deep 20:36spatial memory of the tools rely on for 20:38complex work. It is not getting 20:40disintermediated by perplexity finance. 20:43Whatever perplexity says there's a floor 20:45of coherence that you cannot cross 20:48without hurting performance. I would 20:50also like to call out audit, training, 20:51and compliance is a big flow here. 20:53Regulated environments need very 20:55reproducible flows. Show me exactly what 20:57the user saw when they approved the loan 21:00is not something where you can say it 21:02was a generative interface. So IDK like 21:05that's not going to work with an 21:06auditor. Ephemeral UIs make this very 21:09hard unless you can capture and version 21:10the UI spec itself as a first class 21:12artifact and that gets very very 21:15complicated very very fast. I think that 21:17the the incentives are strongly in favor 21:19of coherent software there. Team 21:22collaboration is probably also a space 21:24where you're going to see coherent 21:25software. So shared work needs shared 21:27views. Look at this dashboard. Check 21:29this queue. And if everyone has a 21:31different ephemeral panel, you need 21:32explicit mechanisms for pinning, for 21:34sharing, for standardizing those panels. 21:36I am going to go out on a limb and I'm 21:38going to suggest I don't know this is 21:40true, but I'm going to suggest that 21:42Slack has basically this vision for 21:44their product roadmap. Slack is becoming 21:46a place that is benefiting from the move 21:50to generative UI. Not because Slack is 21:54itself a generative UI. It's very 21:56stable, but because it is stable and it 21:59is a place where teams collaborate and 22:01know the interface well. It is a place 22:04where all those hooks that Slack has 22:06built into other tools can become 22:09passively agentified. The agentified 22:11benefits can just flow into Slack as a 22:13value proposition. And so when people 22:15build charts in Nano Banana Pro, the 22:17demo videos they do always show them 22:20popping the chart back into Slack where 22:22the team can see it. That is not an 22:24isolated incident. That is where Slack's 22:27value proposition is starting to shift 22:29as a stable team collaboration substrate 22:32in a generative UI world. So the mature 22:35pattern is probably a spectrum. You're 22:37going to have highly standardized and 22:39coherent shells for regulated flows, for 22:41shared operational views, for team 22:43training and onboarding, for team 22:44collaboration, and you're going to have 22:46disposable pixels that operate inside 22:49that shell for exploratory analysis, for 22:51micro decisions, for personalized 22:53shortcuts, for just for me flows. I want 22:55to suggest to you that it is okay that 22:58we have both and that we do not have to 23:00insist on a binary fight like I see so 23:04many times where people will say B2B SAS 23:06is dead and only generative UI is the 23:09future. We will never have stable 23:10interfaces. That's a terrible take. But 23:13an equally terrible take is we will 23:15never see generative UI interfaces in 23:18serious SAS applications. That is just 23:20not true. And anyone who has managed a 23:23serious SAS application as I have will 23:26tell you that we have hundreds or 23:27thousands of pages that we're managing, 23:29many of which we would dearly love to 23:32make generative because they're so 23:34expensive to maintain through the 23:36traditional rubric. And so when I step 23:38back and look at the implication of this 23:40nano banana moment for builders, for 23:42leaders, for talent, I think the thing 23:44that I want to leave you with is this. 23:46Software really is decoupling. It's 23:49decoupling into a substrate that needs 23:51to be stable and a pixel that matters a 23:53whole lot less. If you are in the 23:56business of either pixels or substrates, 23:59this is going to affect you. You should 24:01pay attention. You should think about 24:02your moat. Is your mode on the 24:04substrate? You should think if you're in 24:06talent, if you're in design, if you're 24:08in PM, if you're in engineering, where 24:10are you at in relation to the substrate 24:13and the pixels? Are you stuck in a world 24:15where you're pushing coherent software 24:17and you don't see a way forward or are 24:19you moving to that world where you have 24:21the substrate, the agentic intelligent 24:23layer and the disposable pixel? I do 24:25believe B2B SAS survives as the 24:28substrate and there will be coherent 24:31cores that survive up to the UI layer, 24:33data providing agentic intelligence 24:35layers over the top etc. But 24:37fundamentally pixels themselves as the 24:41the single coherent interface for a 24:43product are going to go away. We have 24:46seen that going away for a while as BI 24:49teams have leaned more and more into 24:51just give me the data for data platforms 24:54and data vendors. They don't want the 24:57fancy dashboard the sales guys sell. 24:59They just want the data. Well, now we're 25:01moving to a world where it's not just 25:03the data science team saying that. It's 25:05the marketers. It's everybody is saying 25:07that. So who wins? Products that are 25:09agent addressable. Products that are 25:11schema clean. Products that can be 25:13composed. Teams that treat UI as a 25:16language and a runtime, not as a set of 25:19frozen screens. And that goes for you as 25:21an individual. It goes for the people 25:23you hire. Who loses? Products whose only 25:25mode is that your interface is 25:27beautiful? Vendors who resist being 25:29called by higher level agents and insist 25:31that users live inside their monolith. 25:33Like you can only do that for so long. 25:35people will find a way around it. One of 25:37the implications of nano banana is that 25:39a computer use agent that is very good 25:41is not far behind. And even if you 25:43insist on living in the monolith, you 25:45could see a world in 2026 where the user 25:48can just get up in the morning, have a 25:49voice conversation with an agent, and 25:51the agent can use a tool to go and 25:55browse the monolith software that you 25:57insist only a human can use, extract the 26:00data, and bring it back to the user. The 26:02user is going to be able to make their 26:04choices. The user is going to be able to 26:06choose their interface. This is going to 26:07be true for consumer. It's going to be 26:09true for business. And it's going to 26:11change everything.