From “Interaction Anxieties”

Q1:

We need to speculate on the cultural and aesthetic worth of interactivity in order to accommodate it more properly in our lifestyles. At the same time, we also need to recognize the opportunities that computing in its different forms – mobile, embedded, and pervasive – offers for changing our expectations and usage of space, architecture and urbanism.

Aren’t elements like “cultural worth” and “computing opportunities” difficult to accurately speculate upon, because they are often suggested by product marketing?

Q2:

McCullough states:

“Like most etiquette, architecture exists not out of pompousness, but because it lets life proceed more
easily. Situated computing extends this age-old preference, where as anytime-anyplace computing does not.”

“Letting life proceed more easily” is a relative statement; wouldn’t “anytime-anyplace” computing eventually fulfill this?

Q3: From “What is interaction?”

What is the distinct difference between the intuitive response of a human being, and potential ‘pattern recognized’ responses of a interactive learning machine?