[kylecazar]

I agree with all of the assertions about what software should be.

But... I think a lot of it already is customizable, and users don't want to configure. End-users (or doctors) hate having to learn more about software than they absolutely must. Just an example, Epic (EHR from the essay) definitely has the ability to mark fields as optional/required. Someone just needs to get in and do it, and they don't want to/know how.

The inaccessibility of config to laypeople may actually be where AI shines. You prompt an in-app modal to change X to Y, and it applies the change. A natural language interface to malleability.

[felipeccastro]

This. Making something super customizable is a lot harder to implement (code being too generic, hard to reason about and debug) and often presents a worse UX ("why are there so many options??"). Having the UX design team interview and consider the needs of each user role interacting with the application, and ensuring the app displays/asks only the appropriate info for each user, hiding the rest and adopting smart defaults (instead of requiring everything), is easier to implement, safer and produces more intuitive interfaces than highly customizable ones, in many cases.