Q1:

From Mark Weiser’s “The Computer for the 21st Century”:

Weiser goes into great detail about the ‘task oriented’ applications of ubiquitous computing, and how it would improve the workplace, but does not to the same degree explore/address the more ‘leisure-based’ usage of the computer (that would greatly expand after the time of this writing). How does this affect his cited ‘benefits’ of ubiquitous computing (less of a barrier for human interaction, speed and efficiency, etc.)?

Q2:

Furthermore, I am unclear as to how ubiquity would eliminate/decline ‘computer addiction’; if, like radio (as per his analogy), computing becomes/became neigh universally accessible, then the element of human interaction would still encourage ‘addicts’ to use it for more and more purposes as they develop and advance. I’m therefore unsure if this connection is valid or not, as radio is a largely one-way system, whereas modern computers are by nature far more interactive with the user.

Q3:

From Anthony Dunne’s “The Electronic as Post-optimal Object”:

As many examples of ‘post-optimization’ involve the redefinition of objects through semiotics, seems to lead to the continuous creation of ‘new unforeseen needs’, and in turn the subsequent creation of solutions for these new needs. Is there a limit to this phenomena, or will this somehow perpetuate infinitely?