Archive for the ‘sci-osophy’ Category

It’s all about the interaction, baby: TEI 2012

Friday, March 2nd, 2012

[TEI 2012 Video Showcase]

Last week I was in Kingston, Ontario, at TEI 2012 — the sixth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. Basically this conference looks at the future of ubiquitous computing, asking questions about how we might use everyday objects that have been imbued with delicious digital magic.

How about a social yoga mat that tells you which position to twist into next or tells your yogi friends you’re practicing right now (and lets you know whether they are, too). Would this mat help you to exercise more?

Champlain Chocolates frogWhat if you could create a physical model with your hands while your computer modelled it simultaneously in a program like CAD? Easy peasy, or rather, Easigami. You could design a totally cool light switch — no boring flip switch or commonplace dimmer for you. It could look like a pair of toe shoes or a peony or a chocolate frog. (Okay, I’m jumping a tiny bit ahead of this tool’s current capability, but such research lends itself to extrapolation.)

You wouldn’t even have to put any electronics into your beautiful design. Using dSensingNI software plus a Kinect (to capture your every move in 3D), you would only need to touch that faux chocolate frog and a signal could be sent telling the electricity to turn on or off. And because you’re unencumbered by the vagaries of wiring, you could attach that switch (fake chocolate frog) wherever you wanted — to the wall, the door, the table. (And yes, dSensingNI + Kinect can do this right now.)

dSensingNI Framework

Pretty cool, huh?

The first time I attended a TEI conference was in 2010 and I was blown away. First off, it was held at the brand-new Media Lab building at MIT. I have to admit I had stars in my eyes because I was such a fan of the MIT Media Lab. And I wasn’t disappointed. The building was gorgeous — all sparkling glass and white leather couches — that’s how I remember it anyhow. And having no more than a news-story knowledge of ubiquitous computing, I was overwhelmed by the diversity of work that imagined how we might not just stare and type at our digital world, but stroke it, listen to it, even blow bubbles across a bowl of water to navigate it.

So I have to admit that this year was a little disappointing on the holy-crap-it-can-do-what?!! meter. Almost all of the projects presented, discussed and demoed were just chugging along the continuum of poking, stroking, throwing, hearing and splashing. Although there was one art project in particular I still remember, Memory of a Tree, which was beautifully realized. A bare tree branch stands in a glass box. When at least two hands are placed in the handprints at the top of the box, the tree’s shadow begins to flower. When the hands are pulled away, the tree loses its leaves to an invisible wind. As co-creator António Gomes’ explains,

My grandmom who has Alzheimer’s disease often said with awareness of herself that her life is over. [...] People often say that old creatures had their beautiful time before; [but] they are still beautiful like that dead branch is also beautiful. So it seems too hard to define which part of life is more meaningful. Just, through this work, I want to say that all creatures blossom in the beauty of each moments involving the moment which recalls the past.

[The Memory of a Tree, from Oh, Hyun Joo]

There were also several demos that were a pleasure to watch in action or play with, like the TK 730 knitting machine or Machine à Turlute. And the closing keynote, Programming Materiality, by Joanna Berzowska of XS Labs, made me want to leave my job, move to Montreal and join her program at Concordia University.

But nothing lit my brain on fire.

Then I realized that ubiquitous computing is finally becoming, well, ubiquitous. Which is really exciting. Quite a few of the projects presented at TEI 2012 use the sophisticated motion-capture ability of Microsoft’s Kinect, which has become commonplace in many American households. We’re no longer amazed by the fact that we don’t need a controller in one hand in order to interact with a computer program. We’re becoming accustomed to the idea of the digital existing elsewhere, in the “cloud.” And we have no difficulty with the idea of an object existing simultaneously in the digital and physical realms, even if our concepts of what they are overlap. For example, we read books on our e-readers, yet we also read books as books; we’re not confused by a book being on an e-reader and simultaneously a physical object in and of itself.

In fact, over the last two years, our ability to navigate ubiquitous computing has grown at an unprecedented rate. Which actually makes the TEI conference all that much more interesting.

Let’s go back to that light switch for a minute.

Would anyone recognize our fake chocolate frog as a light switch if you didn’t tell them? I think you might have a light switch with a lot of bite marks. And what about putting the switch on a table instead of a wall? Useful or silly? What if the object were somehow recognizable as a light switch and on a table in addition to the wall. Now that might be a good idea. For some people. Which is what the TEI conference is all about: interaction. How we use the digital possibilities already in our world. How we create new embodied hybrids. And how all of this changes us and the world we live in.

Digital interactions are now as much a part of our world as the pine trees in my back yard that grow like weeds. And we need a conference like TEI to help us touch, hear and splash our way forward. Watch the entire conference on Ustream.

Don’t censor the web

Wednesday, January 18th, 2012

Some of my favorite sites — like Instructablesxkcd and Boing Boing — and others I use all the time — like YouTube and Wikipedia — are a product of and are only possible in an open internet that promotes the free exchange of knowledge.

Even a tiny site like mine is only possible in a world where I’m not in legal jeopardy if I link to a site anywhere online that has any links to copyright infringement (how could I possibly police that?).

Legislation currently pending in the US congress — H.R.3261 “Stop Online Piracy Act” (SOPA) and S.968 “PROTECT IP” (PIPA) — threaten, at a minimum, to significantly undermine our (that’s all of us on the web, people) ability to communicate with each other and encourage collaborative learning through linking to and direct sharing of resources and ideas. At worst, some of our favorite websites could disappear from the web without warning, and without due process of law.

So PLEASE take just a minute to contact your representatives in congress. For more information about what these bills could mean for the internet, there are more resources over at the EFF.

Thanks!

Rube Goldberg machines and what they have to do with writing

Saturday, February 5th, 2011

In case the name’s not ringing any bells, a Rube Goldberg machine is an overly complicated piece of engineering that can seemly go awry and grind to a halt at any point.

Do you remember the game Mouse Trap? A boot kicks over a bucket sending a marble down a stair and through a chute to a pole with a hand on top holding another ball that drops down through a hole into a bathtub — on and on it goes until the mouse cage comes rattling down, trapping the poor mice below. That game was my first exposure to a Rube Goldberg machine and I thought it was incredibly fascinating and clever.

Well, I was recently reading in Fast Company about Syyn Labs, a team best known for the Rube Goldberg machine it built for the band OK Go’s “This Too Shall Pass” video. This fun-loving and hard-working team learned when constructing their RB machine to put the most unreliable parts first, so if they didn’t work, it didn’t take as long to reset before testing again. And it took them 6 months to make their contraption and 85 takes to film it in a single shot.

So what does this have to do with writing?

Over the past three months, I’ve been trying to write faster. To get that first draft down and only then go back and edit the hell out of it. I have a tendency to nit-pick myself to death over nuance, or what I perceive to be nuance in word choice, sentence structure, rhythm, etc.

So I flew through the first five chapters of my new book, was driven to get it down. Then slam, I hit a roadblock — I needed to do some heavy-duty research before continuing. And I’ve been beating myself up for it over the past three weeks. Was I falling back into my old habits, I wondered, deluding myself that I was being productive when I was merely not writing?

But what if the writing process is the same as making a Rube Goldberg machine? What if the beginning comprises the pieces that can most easily go awry, and so it’s not such a bad idea to stop and make sure all your ducks (or dominoes) are in a row before continuing? Maybe getting that basis right is important and then you’re ready to fly through the rest before you go back and edit, edit, edit.

Is a Rube Goldberg machine just a diversion or is it something more? Is art just a diversion or must it be something more? Sometimes I think it’s pointless to wonder about such ideas while other times I feel the need to reach a conclusion, or at least to form an opinion.

Maybe all art is a form of Rube Goldberg machine, and all Rube Golderg machines are art — overly complex ways of saying/showing the simplicity of a thing so that we can marvel at it.

That works for me today.

Geek on the Cheap #125:
Last Bit of MIT – Quantum Mechanics Made (Sort of) Easy

Monday, February 15th, 2010

Okay, this is my last MIT-related GoC for the near future. I couldn’t resist this post because a friend of mine is editing a book by Walter Lewin, the well-known MIT physics professor (emeritus) whose lectures plunk physics solidly into the realm of the knowable for the average person (or undergraduate).

And who doesn’t want to impress her friends and colleagues with an understanding (however shallow) of quantum physics? That’s what I’ll be gabbing about at Mah Jongg next weekend, filling my competitors ears with a fuzzy explanation of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle as they try to make a hand. (Clever strategy, no?)

And I’m challenging you to hop to the head of the class with this lecture, the last in Lewin’s course on classical mechanics, which is available in its entirety through MIT OpenCourseWare. And for those of you who prefer to read, you can find the entire transcript here.

Why should you care about quantum mechanics? Because, as Lewin says, “[it's] a bizarre world that we rarely experience in our daily lives, because we are used to basketballs, baseballs, tennis balls [classical mechanics].” In other words, quantum mechanics is not intuitive. And this is an important concept in and of itself for practicing science, politics and life: Intuition does not equal truth.

But enough tiny philosophy. Next week we’re back to brass tacks – an inexpensive computer build you don’t have to build.