쉐도잉 연습: Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins! - 영상으로 영어 말하기 배우기

연습 모드 선택

각 모드는 전체 화면 연습실로 열립니다.

151 문장

문장이 너무 짧거나 길면 Edit를 눌러 조정하세요.

So let's say you have a working app that solves a real problem, but users are struggling with it.

What do you do?

You either hire a UX designer or you try to fix it yourself with AI.

So you decide to give it a shot with AI.

Now where do you start?

You can't just tell AI to fix the UX and let it figure everything out, right?

Well, I just realized that with Claude, you can actually do that.

Just last week, I made a video where I shared my simplified professional UX process into prompts

that will get your AI to follow the correct methods to identify UX problems and to fix them.

And I specifically said that you can't just tell AI to fix your UX

and expect it to create a coherent user -friendly product.

Well, I was wrong.

The problem with my assumption is that I only tested it with Codex, and I assumed that Codex and Claude were somewhat at the same level,

since that's what the benchmarks are saying.

But that's not the case.

Claude just reached a level where I honestly didn't think would be possible this soon.

And after this video, I'm not going to be using Codex for coding and UI UX anymore.

My name is Jad.

I've been UI UX designer for over 10 years, but now everything is changing

if you want to stay updated on how ai is changing my work make sure

you turn on the notification bell and

if you need any help with ui ux

or coding you can submit your project on ai tooltip .com the example

i'm going to show you is a marketing platform

that i built in a recent video it's for my wife to manage her own marketing clients

and she's been adding features to it based on her usage requirements

so of course now it has a lot of usability issues and it's my turn to improve the UX.

I made two copies of the same platform.

I put one through my own AI UX workflow with the prompts

that I shared in my last video and I gave the other to Claude to fix all on its own.

Then I'll show you how Claude compares to Codex just for fun.

I think you know where this is going, but keep watching till the end because it all comes together.

And I'm going to tell you how I'm going to be approaching UX projects from now on.

Now, for my workflow, I gave AI multiple consecutive prompts to identify UX issues.

And it found 26 problems.

And then I fixed them by priority.

Now, this is not manual UX work.

I'm still using AI to identify the problems and to fix them.

But I'm guiding the AI based on my own process to identify user context issues,

to make sure the user journey is optimized and to fix consistency issues

and states issues and to make sure everything is considered.

Now for the other copy of the platform, I simply gave it to Claude and I said, you are a UX expert,

analyze and optimize the whole platform.

I put it on Opus 5 .5 in UltraCode, which is the maximum effort on the latest model.

It worked for a while on its own.

It ran multiple agent tests and many, many commands.

It found 40 problems and it fixed everything just with that one prompt.

Now I went through the two improved platforms and I compared them.

There's noticeable differences and I'm gonna say it up front.

I liked what Claude did on its own more than what my own workflow produced and that's why I'm making this video.

Now that doesn't mean we don't need you ex -designers anymore.

I'm just comparing AI with AI here.

Whether we need to know how to prompt it or if anyone can just say fix the UX.

Let me show you the results side by side and then I'll show you an analysis of how the two results compare.

On the left side is the result of my own workflow

and on the right side is what Claude did all on its own.

The first thing I noticed here is how Claude moved the client selector to the top bar

and made that bar sticky so it doesn't move when I scroll.

That means I always know which client I am working on.

This is a very good improvement that my workflow did not identify.

Here when you select a client and scroll you won't be able to identify which client you are working on.

But here it adds clarity.

Very much needed.

Claude also consolidated all the text in the top section of the page to have less debt space.

That's also very important because this is a high priority real estate.

What you see on your screen before scrolling should be the high priority stuff.

So more space for content is always better.

Another thing I immediately noticed here is how the navigation is organized.

Originally I had no groups but now both results are improving on that.

They grouped the menu items in different ways and based on my wife's usage she prefers what Claude did.

It makes more sense in terms of usability and user journey.

It's also visually easier to scan because it's more compact.

Even here at the bottom Claude reduced the amount of text and made the whole thing clickable.

As opposed to here where you have just a small target to click, it makes sense.

Another great improvement from Claude.

Now the dashboard itself also got improved in both cases, but Claude is more optimized towards what the user actually needs.

Here on the left side, there's a lot of wasted space just to display the status of the client,

then a long list of to -do items, then you get to the progress tracking.

But what Claude did here on the right side is impressive from my UX perspective.

This to -do list is smaller, more compact, and it grouped the important tasks at the top.

Here on the left, you have to look all the way down to see a task due today.

But Claude surfaced it to the top here.

And even the language is much more helpful.

Needs attention is better than tasks and this see all button is much better than all reminders.

All reminders does not tell me what action I am taking if I click it.

It's a little bit confusing because I don't know

if these are all my reminders or if I click it I see all my reminders.

Cloud also introduced something different here where you can see more items without leaving the page.

That way it can make the list smaller.

Small things like that improve the usability a lot.

Overall much better visibility and interaction in Claude's UX design.

And if you want a copy of this improved marketing platform let me know in a comment

and I'll be happy to share it.

All right let's go deeper and complete a user task.

Let's assess this content performance.

On the left side I'll click write assessment and here this is a new improvement it's telling me what I'm assessing.

It's actually showing me the result here, which is very important info.

It does not show me what I'm assessing here.

And it does not show me the previous result, which is important info to have.

100

So this one is better in my workflow, because I explicitly told it to analyze user intent and context and goals.

101

So for this feature, I get the win.

102

There's also a lot of improvements

103

that Claude did on its own in the campaign strategies page

104

it decided to move my strategies to the top instead of scrolling down to find them here

105

i can see my strategies then how they are doing my wife also preferred claude here

106

now i won't waste your time too much here analyzing

107

but let me know in the comments

108

if you want a more in -depth analysis for ux for complex platforms like this one i would be happy to share.

109

Here's how the two results compare.

110

This is based on my test result and the report that came out of each AI.

111

Now in terms of UI change, Claude did better by considering these areas that I showed you in my review.

112

But on a deeper level, my workflow actually improved things that Claude did not really catch,

113

like helping the user with relevant context for certain actions and failed save recovery.

114

These are things to avoid user frustration and improve user satisfaction.

115

So if you want max optimization, ask Claude to do its thing, and then follow up by using the prompts from my previous video.

116

And just for fun, let me show you what ChatGPT did with Codex on the latest and strongest model.

117

Here I have sold 6 .1 on UltraEffert, and I gave it the same prompt, and the result is not even close to what Claude did.

118

When I used Codex on the strongest model, I thought it would be close to Claude, but the result here is just not good at all.

119

Here, it did not consider any of the usability changes that Claude did.

120

It kept mostly everything the same as it was.

121

Nothing really changed with the main user flow and the context of the user.

122

Claude is much better.

123

So this tells me that we still need to guide the AI to find deeper usability issues,

124

but AI is only getting more powerful from this point.

125

Who knows, maybe with the next update things can become easy for AI to spot.

126

But what surprised me is that Claude didn't just clean up the interface, it made decisions about what the user needs to see,

127

what needs attention first, and where actions belong.

128

And in many of the flows that I showed you, I preferred Claude's version, And so did my wife, who is actually using the platform.

129

My workflow still helped in specific areas.

130

But what Claude did is real independent UX work from just one prompt.

131

And that changes how I would approach UX next time.

132

I would let Claude do the first pass, then test the important journey with real users who are actually using the product.

133

Where do they hesitate?

134

What information is missing?

135

Real user testing will never be eliminated by AI.

136

A week ago I said you couldn't just ask AI to fix your UX

137

and expect it to do the work we do as designers.

138

This experiment proved me wrong.

139

So I'm changing my opinion.

140

AI can now make good UX improvements without expert guidance.

141

It can still miss some things, but I think it produces good enough UX to launch a product.

142

And considering the rate at which AI is improving, I'm sorry to say this, but soon UI UX jobs won't be needed anymore.

143

We would still need UX research and strategy, yes.

144

We would also need to conduct real user testing and analysis.

145

That still takes human experience.

146

So the most important thing I want to leave you with is that everyone should be using AI.

147

Let me know what you think.

148

Do you agree?

149

Do you disagree?

150

I always answer everything down in the comments.

151

Cheers.

앱 다운로드

유창하게 말하는 데 필요한 모든 것

AI 발음 평가문장마다 점수 확인

IPA 발음 연습모든 소리 마스터

단어 학습나만의 단어장 만들기

단어 게임놀면서 외우기

QR 스캔

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

같은 채널

10 Years Of UX/UI Experience In One Claude Skill

Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

The Simplest UI/UX Workflow With AI

Daily ConversationWorking Adults

FOR YOU

이 레슨의 어휘와 말하기 포인트

이 말하기 레슨은 영상 “Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins!”을(를) 바탕으로 합니다. 가장 자주 반복되는 단어는 다음과 같습니다: claude, user, result, fix, workflow. 이 영상에는 섀도잉할 문장 151개와 단어 1903개가 있습니다. 말하는 구간의 길이는 10:46입니다. 화자는 분당 약 177단어로, 일상 대화에 가까운 자연스러운 속도로 말합니다. 단어의 83%가 영어에서 가장 많이 쓰이는 3,000단어에 속합니다. 나머지는 연습 전에 미리 확인해 두세요.

이 영상의 핵심 어휘

영상에 나오는 익혀 둘 만한 단어 15개를 발음, 뜻과 함께 정리했습니다.

단어	발음	뜻
prompt 동사	/pɹɑmpt/	부추기다
compare 동사	/kəmˈpɛɚ/	비교하다, 비유하다
designer 명사	/dɪˈzaɪnɚ/	디자이너
scroll 명사	/skɹoʊl/	두루마리, 스크롤
priority 명사	/pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/	우선, 우선권
analyze 동사	/ˈæn.əˌlaɪz/	분석하다
impressive 형용사	/ɪmˈpɹɛsɪv/	인상적
assessment 명사	/əˈsɛsmənt/	평가
cloud 명사	/ˈklaʊ̯d/	구름
select 동사	/sɪˈlɛkt/	고르다
solve 동사	/sɒlv/	해결하다
hire 동사	/ˈhaɪɹ/	고용하다
belong 동사	/bɪˈlɒŋ/	속하다
experiment 명사	/ɪkˈspɛɹ.ə.mənt/	실험
manual 명사	/ˈmæn.j(u)əl/	안내서, 매뉴얼

이 영상의 문법

화자가 가장 많이 쓰는 문형을 영상 속 실제 표현과 함께 정리했습니다.

문형	영상 속 표현
수동태 be + 과거분사 — 누가 하는지보다 무슨 일이 일어나는지에 초점	is optimized · is considered · is organized
관계절 who / which + 절 — 사람이나 사물에 대한 추가 정보	UltraCode, which is · here, which is · result, which is
현재완료 have/has + 과거분사 — 과거의 일이 지금도 관련이 있을 때	I've been · have sold

주의할 발음

화자는 I'm, I'll, won't 같은 축약형과 약화된 형태를 31번 사용합니다. 들리는 대로 짧게 발음하세요.

“sh”와 “zh” 소리: interaction /ˌɪn.təˈɹæk.ʃən/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/, assumption /əˈsʌm(p).ʃ(ə)n/, navigation /nævɪˈɡeɪʃən/, frustration /fɹʌsˈtɹeɪ.ʃən/
긴 단어 — 강세 위치에 주의: priority /pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/, experiment /ɪkˈspɛɹ.ə.mənt/, interaction /ˌɪn.təˈɹæk.ʃən/, consecutive /kənˈsɛkjʊtɪv/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/

한국어 화자가 어려워하는 소리:

/f/ — ㅍ(/p/)으로 바꾸지 말고 윗니를 아랫입술에 대기: helpful /ˈhɛlp.fl̩/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/, interface /ˈɪn(t)ɚˌfeɪs/, frustration /fɹʌsˈtɹeɪ.ʃən/, notification /ˌnoʊtɪfɪˈkeɪʃn̩/
/v/ — ㅂ(/b/)과 구별하기: impressive /ɪmˈpɹɛsɪv/, solve /sɒlv/, consecutive /kənˈsɛkjʊtɪv/, navigation /nævɪˈɡeɪʃən/, visibility /ˌvɪz.əˈbɪl.ɪ.ti/
/z/ — ㅈ이 아니라 성대를 울리는 /s/: designer /dɪˈzaɪnɚ/, analyze /ˈæn.əˌlaɪz/, cheers /t͡ʃɪəz/, organize /ˈɔɹɡənaɪz/, oppose /əˈpoʊz/

이 영상으로 연습하는 방법

먼저 말하지 않고 영상을 끝까지 듣고 모르는 단어를 적어 둡니다.
0.75배속으로 한 문장씩 섀도잉을 시작하고, 익숙해지면 보통 속도로 돌아갑니다.
자신의 목소리를 녹음해 원본과 비교하고, prompt, compare, designer 같은 단어에 특히 주의합니다.

쉐도잉이란? 영어 실력을 빠르게 키우는 과학적 방법

쉐도잉(Shadowing)은 원래 전문 통역사 훈련을 위해 개발된 언어 학습 기법으로, 다언어 학자인 Dr. Alexander Arguelles에 의해 대중화된 방법입니다. 핵심 원리는 간단하지만 매우 강력합니다: 원어민의 영어를 들으면서 1~2초의 짧은 지연으로 즉시 소리 내어 따라 말하는 것——마치 '그림자(shadow)'처럼 화자를 따라가는 것입니다. 문법 공부나 수동적인 청취와 달리, 쉐도잉은 뇌와 입 근육이 동시에 실시간으로 영어를 처리하고 재현하도록 훈련합니다. 연구에 따르면 이 방법은 발음 정확도, 억양, 리듬, 연음, 청취력, 말하기 유창성을 크게 향상시킵니다. IELTS 스피킹 준비와 자연스러운 영어 소통을 원하는 분들에게 특히 효과적입니다.

섀도잉 방법: 단계별 전체 가이드 읽기 →

쉐도잉 연습: Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins! - 영상으로 영어 말하기 배우기

연습 모드 선택

앱 다운로드

같은 채널

10 Years Of UX/UI Experience In One Claude Skill

The Simplest UI/UX Workflow With AI

추천 영상

AI Destroyed My Profession

Rethinking Claude Code Best Practices — Lydia Hallie, Anthropic

Is AI Killing Human Fashion Design? Who Will Shape the Future of Design? Fashion Tea #6

I knew AI + Notion would be good, but this... wow.

I Tested The Viral Reverse Engineering Repo

The UX Psychology Behind Apps People Can’t Stop Using

How to Edit VIRAL Talking Head Videos Using ONLY Claude! (New Minimal Style)

I Looked Into How Devs Are Actually Using AI

LangChain in 5 Minutes (Explained Clearly)

Jack Dorsey’s New Dessa AI Voice Sounds Scary Human

My 4.9-Star iOS App Is Actually a Website: Here’s How I Built It