Here is how Jamin relates this:
"One audience member asked Moggridge to reflect on defining
interaction design as a discipline. In his response, he said that it
was necessary at the time to define it as a discipline because
software was so new and no one knew how to design it. But now that
it’s pervasive, interaction design as a discipline may no longer be
I think there are a few issues here:
1) Having just had a conversation with Bill Moggridge about a new
program in IxD I'm creating I know he isn't saying that IxD is not
necessary any longer and there is some aspect of this that doesn't
feel right to me. So I'm going to project my own interpretation ...
2) I think the issue has to do with practice vs. discipline. In
practice a separate role for IxD is probably growingly unnecessary. I
don't think we are there yet, but people like Bill M. who surrounds
himself with people "who get it" probably have a good grasp of the
future ahead of us. I think Tim concurs with this.
3) Like I said discipline is not the same as practice. In order to
maintain that people keep getting it and that we do a better job in
total of everyone getting it better the discipline is still incredibly
important and remains differentiated, or at least contextually
differentiated in each medium.