The best interface is no interface
I have two criticisms of the article:1. Every story is a 'just so' story where the way the system works is exactly the way the user wants the system to work.  Great, it's like putting a button front and center on your app and the user wants to push that button and look!  It's right there!  Awesome.  Except I don't want to push that button, I want to push the other button that's now hidden away because the designer is striving for "No UI".  The new minimalist interface is now actively fighting me.  What if I don't want my car to unlock when I approach it?2. Using AI is a "step 2: ???" solution, and the flaw with it is best exemplified by the columnist who bought a pregnancy book for a pregnant friend on Amazon... and now his Amazon suggestion stream is now still filled with baby clothes that are age appropriate for his friend's baby, years later.  For every adaptive step the non-interface takes on the basis of past behaviour, it's a step away from future behaviour that's different than past behaviour.I suppose my criticisms come down to the fact that the article doesn't seem to acknowledge that design trade-offs are a normal part of interface work.  It strongly implies there's a hallowed land where every use case is obvious and accounted for and we all just "do".  Annoying, in the same way that we all get annoyed when another framework comes along and is in its silver bullet phase where it's the awesomest solution to everything you need it to do.