K- Pervasive Computing

1) Mark Weiser, “The Computer for the 21st Century”, Scientific American, September 1991.

Negin

1. What would be the disadvantages for the invisible and ubiquitous computing? In this article it seems that Weiser  excitingly describe a world with ubiquitous computers technology however in the last paragraphs he wants to mention disadvantages of it.

2. How can “ubiquitous computing” cause a decline of the computer addict in society?

William

To what degree is Weiser et al.’s attempt to “conceive a new way of thinking about computers”  a product of existing technology? It in many ways sought to solve perceived problems with the existing model, which, with the introduction of contemporary paradigms, might challenge the contemporary relevance of this model of ubiquitous computing. How do we re-frame these ideas for the world we live in?

Where does this model of ubiquitous computing situate identity? The axiom “a pad that must be carried from place to place is a failure” might suggest using a computing device to sequester a part of user identity,  differing from our contemporary tendency to use devices as access points to an extended user identity.  How do devices as access points (device as interface?) fit into Weiser’s model?

Rob-

1.      It’s interesting to read about the ideas from twenty years ago since many have been developed since then.  The post-it note, notebook, and blackboard are all objects that can be equated to modern computer technology.

2.      It seems as if we have strayed a bit from the vision presented by Weiser.  Instead of creating technologies that are cheaper, so that they can become more ubiquitous, we are making things that are more powerful.  Additionally, he discusses the idea of tablets that could be used like sheets of paper that are just spread out in front of a person so they don’t have to flip between things.  Our products are made to consolidate objects instead.  For example, although we have tablets, they are meant to be used on their own rather than using a bunch at a time (they are also generally too expensive for one to own a lot).

3.      Why is it that we have moved away from the idea of having many computers?  It seems as if it would be more beneficial (financially) for companies to make products more along the lines of what Weiser presents.

Yuan:

1. What could the “seam” be mentioned in the statement “The idea of integrating computer seamless into the world at large runs counter to a number of present-day trends”?

2. According to author’s description of ubiquitous computing world in both workplace and Sal’s life, how to address the issue of privacy when devices are aware of context? How about cost and energy consuming problem?

Yi

Q1: On page 80 Weiser mentioned there are two issues of crucial importance: location and scale. What are the typical ways for computers to sense the locations and occasions?

Q2: As ubiquitous computing becoming dominant mode of computer access, there will be more sharing of all kinds of resources, how does it change social relationship and network?

Q3: What is the key issue for ubiquitous computers to solve the problem of information overload and achieve ease of use?

2) Anthony Dunne, “The Electronic as Post-optimal Object”, Hertzian Tales: Electronic Products, Aesthetic Experience and Critical Design, RCA Computer Related Design Research, May 1999.

Negin

What is the meaning of  “post optimal object” ? Because in the “Lost Object”, Dunne explains about “semiotic” which looks similar to the idea of post optimal object.

William

Can a post-optimal object escape symbol?

To what extent will software be able to replace physical experience? Does the post optimal object exist?

Rob-

On page 13, the idea of dematerialization is discussed.  Technologies, such as the telephone or the Electronic Room could, potentially, dematerialize experiences (the experience of being in the same physical space with a person you’re talking to, in the case of the telephone, or being in a physical environment, in the case of the room).  However, these technologies do not fully replace the actual experience in the minds of users.  What is it that they are missing?  How can this be captured and incorporated in the technology?  Or could it ever really be fully captured?  Are we moving towards a more convincing dematerialization with technologies such as Skype (where we can both talk to and see a person who is not physically in our presence)?

Yi

Q1: How to understand Manzini and Susani’s theory “In the fluid world the permanent features we need are no longer there as a matter of course, but are the result of our desire; the ‘solid side’ in a fluid world, if and when it exists, will be the result of a design”?(P4)

Q2: On page 13 the author mentioned “telematic tools were proposed where the quality of experience they offered would reduce the desire to travel”, since the information and experience delivered to the users are selected and filtered by the providers, it may not be able to reflect the reality. Would the dependence on information technology have the problem of keeping people away from the real world?

3) William Mitchell, “Recombinant Architecture”, City of Bits, MIT Press, 1995.

Negin

It seems that Mitchell, after explaining several examples in architecture, puts the idea of  “programmable places” as a new architecture idea in 21th century. Can we expect that in the future the architecture design becomes completely different from the past?

William

Should/can we challenge placenessness? The author warns that eliminating traditional urban distinction will “alter the basic fabric of our lives,” but this has arguably already happened. Could we describe building as interface total placelessness?

Only four years after Weiser was published, “Recombinant Architecture” presents a different version of ubiquitous computing, one less focused on specific place. Assuming this is a result of the internet’s rise to popularity, how much has the change in both internet and access to it changed our understanding of ubiquitous computing?

Rob-

1.      Is it fair to say that, in the sixteen years since this was written, we’ve moved much closer to the ideas presented in the essay?  Today, people have their work, their social life, and their entertainment all on one portable device (a smart phone, tablet, or laptop).  Therefore, the boundaries between these three realms are blurred and each activity can occur in any location.

2.      Mitchell seems to be defining a new role for the architect, one in which the architect is responsible for both the virtual and physical environments.  Are these dual roles meant to be taken on by the same person or would they be different branches of architecture?

3.      Could we eventually reach a point where the physical environment is no longer really important because the virtual environment has become the primary environment?

Yi

If computer interfaces become buildings in the future, would they replace some of the traditional building materials or embedded into those materials? If the digital interface becomes more successful in creating certain experience and atmosphere in the building, what would the value of traditional material be?