This article hints had why I am always suspicious of "UX" and "UI" engineers. As it notes there is a strong resistance to formalism of any sort, and working with and considering the user doesn't seem to be the first element of design rather a focus on "style" and "differentiation" seem to plague the field. Ultimately software is to be used to accomplish a task and if you aren't aiding in that are you really adding value.

Of course as I type this comment I am forced to confront my own hideous reflection as a software engineers as all of the criticisms I level at "UI" and "UX" engineering apply just as well to my own field. The difference is instead of being Bohemians about how the drop shadow effects the overall sense of user well being, we are hipsters in whatever the newest framework or language is because it introduces some old concept repackaged as a new feature and is the hot shit. Many argue that programming is more of an art than a science that a good developer can just right good code and it can really be measured, and how often is software projects, personal or professional derailed by wanting to have a "pure and elegant" architecture, or one that is hyper scale, meanwhile the business just wants crap done, and there is plenty of times that developers build something without ever talking to a user.

I don't know maybe there is some reflection to be taken out of this. On the other hand I think designers have been screwing with things to much we reached the pinnacle of UI and UX in the Unix tool chain, CLI, terminal, text based human computer interaction and everything after that is designed for wussies that aren't worthy to work a keyboard.