These are not required for class; this is just a place to collect some of my reflections as I work through the class readings. Not every reading will necessarily be represented; I’m only including them if there are notes or questions that occur to me while reading that I want to keep track of.

The Design of Implicit Interactions

*https://wendyju.com/publications/Ju_design_issues.pdf*

• Interesting that this framework frames its initiative axis from the point of view of the system rather than of the user (so the user initiating is reactive because the system is reacting to them, vs proactive when the system initiates)
• I’d love to read more into the research they mention using peripheral displays to present information (citations 9 and 10)
• “There are conventional ways toa ct poactively, even in the face of uncertainty, and these are a matter of sociable design rather than tecnological intelligence” — they mention how people engage in certain behaviors to show their proactive activity as tentative/preempt apology if it’s unwanted; what would an apologetic machine interaction look like? Would trying to replicate these kind of cues feel disingenuous?

Design of Everyday Things, Chapter 1

• “Whether the device is a door or a stove, a mobile phone or a nuclear power plant, the relevant components must be visible, and they must communicate the correct message: What actions are possible?”
  • what if the purpose of the object is to obfuscate part of its functionality (like a hidden compartment in a desk drawer)?
• “All artificial things are designed. Whether it is the layout of furniture in a room, the paths through a garden or forest, or the intricacies of an electronic device, some person or group of people had to decide upon the layout, operation, and mechanisms.”
  • Paths through a forest seems to me an odd example to use here — in my experience with forest paths, they are often emergent phenomena rather than specifically designed; a person (or animal) weaves their way through trees and undergrowth towards where they want to go. As they pass through, they trample down undergrowth or remove obstacles, and it becomes easier to walk that way — the next person traveling that direction is then more likely to follow the same pattern, and over time it wears away into a path. Created by people, perhaps, but not necessarily planned or designed.
    • He even mentions something like this later in the chapter: “Signifiers can be deliberate and intentional, such as the sign PUSH on a door, but they may also be accidental and unintentional, such as our use of the visible trail made by previous people walking through a field or over a snow-covered terrain to determine the best path.”
• “Note that there are many mappings that feel “natural” but in fact are specific to a particular culture: what is natural for one culture is not necessarily natural for another. In Chapter 3, I discuss how different cultures view time, which has important implications for some kinds of mappings.”
  • How do we define “natural,” and how do we separate it from culturally defined conceptions/norms?

Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits

• Floor pads as a way to collect input from dancing — I find these interesting because of the way they change the priority of movement when dancing; rather than being focused on the whole body, suddenly your footsteps are the thing that matters the most (at least to the machine). I wonder how the experience of floor pad dancing games like Dance Dance Revolution compares to ones that use other kinds of input, like Just Dance.