<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <title>Orange Cone</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://orangecone.com/atom.xml" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010-06-15://2</id>
    <updated>2010-08-23T20:23:45Z</updated>
    <subtitle>Mike Kuniavsky&apos;s public notebook.  email me at: blog c/o this site.</subtitle>
    <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 5.02</generator>

<entry>
    <title>Information is a Material (Device Design Day talk transcript)</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/08/information_is_.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010://2.401</id>

    <published>2010-08-23T20:00:39Z</published>
    <updated>2010-08-23T20:23:45Z</updated>

    <summary><![CDATA[The following is the transcript of the talk I gave at Device Design Day last Friday. You can download the PDF&nbsp;(885K), with all images and transcript, or look through it (and download the original Powerpoint) on Slideshare. Device Design Day: Information is a MaterialView more presentations from mikek. INFORMATION IS A MATERIALGood Morning! Thank you very much for inviting me. It's a pleasure to be here. ABOUT ME First, let me tell you a bit about myself. Most of my professional career over the last 17 years has been spent as a consulting creative director, interaction designer, user researcher and user experience strategy consultant. I started doing Web design in the Jurassic era of the Web, the early 1990s--this is the logo of the first commercial website I designed in 1993. Since then I've worked with probably hundreds of web sites, and I've also helped a number of large electronics companies with their user experience issues. I sat out the first dotcom crash writing a book based on the work I had been doing. It's a cookbook of user research methods. And 2001 I co-founded a design and consulting company called Adaptive Path. I left the Web behind in 2005...]]></summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="appliance" label="appliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="presentation" label="presentation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="servicedesign" label="service design" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>The following is the transcript of the talk I gave at <a href="http://www.devicedesignday.com">Device Design Day</a> last Friday.</p>

<p>You can <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/d3_2010_information_is_a_material_0.2.pdf">download the PDF</a>&nbsp;(885K), with all images and transcript, or look through it (and download the original Powerpoint) on <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/mikek/device-design-day-information-is-a-material-5040207">Slideshare</a>.</p>

<div style="width:425px" id="__ss_5040207"><strong style="display:block;margin:12px 0 4px"><a href="http://www.slideshare.net/mikek/device-design-day-information-is-a-material-5040207" title="Device Design Day: Information is a Material">Device Design Day: Information is a Material</a></strong><object id="__sse5040207" width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://static.slidesharecdn.com/swf/ssplayer2.swf?doc=d32010informationisamaterial0-2-100823130407-phpapp01&amp;stripped_title=device-design-day-information-is-a-material-5040207" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><div style="display: block; cursor: pointer; text-align: center; width: 425px; height: 355px; top: auto; left: auto; position: static; "><div style="-webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 150ms; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; background-image: url(chrome-extension://gofhjkjmkpinhpoiabjplobcaignabnl/icon_play.png); text-align: left; opacity: 0.25; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(193, 217, 244, 0.496094); background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div><div style="display: block; cursor: pointer; text-align: center; width: 425px; height: 355px; top: auto; left: auto; position: static; "><div style="-webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 150ms; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; background-image: url(chrome-extension://gofhjkjmkpinhpoiabjplobcaignabnl/icon_play.png); text-align: left; opacity: 0.25; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(193, 217, 244, 0.496094); background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div><div style="display: block; cursor: pointer; text-align: center; width: 425px; height: 355px; top: auto; left: auto; position: static; "><div style="-webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 150ms; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; background-image: url(chrome-extension://gofhjkjmkpinhpoiabjplobcaignabnl/icon_play.png); text-align: left; opacity: 0.25; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(193, 217, 244, 0.496094); background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div><div style="display: block; cursor: pointer; text-align: center; width: 425px; height: 355px; top: auto; left: auto; position: static; "><div style="-webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 150ms; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; background-image: url(chrome-extension://gofhjkjmkpinhpoiabjplobcaignabnl/icon_play.png); text-align: left; opacity: 0.25; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(193, 217, 244, 0.496094); background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div><div style="display: block; cursor: pointer; text-align: center; width: 425px; height: 355px; top: auto; left: auto; position: static; "><div style="-webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 150ms; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; background-image: url(chrome-extension://gofhjkjmkpinhpoiabjplobcaignabnl/icon_play.png); text-align: left; opacity: 0.25; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(193, 217, 244, 0.496094); background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div><div style="display: block; cursor: pointer; text-align: center; width: 425px; height: 355px; top: auto; left: auto; position: static; "><div style="-webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 150ms; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; background-image: url(chrome-extension://gofhjkjmkpinhpoiabjplobcaignabnl/icon_play.png); text-align: left; opacity: 0.25; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(193, 217, 244, 0.496094); background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div><div style="display: block; cursor: pointer; text-align: center; width: 425px; height: 355px; top: auto; left: auto; position: static; "><div style="-webkit-transition-property: opacity; -webkit-transition-duration: 150ms; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out; -webkit-transition-delay: initial; background-image: url(chrome-extension://gofhjkjmkpinhpoiabjplobcaignabnl/icon_play.png); text-align: left; opacity: 0.25; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(193, 217, 244, 0.496094); background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div></div><embed name="__sse5040207" src="http://static.slidesharecdn.com/swf/ssplayer2.swf?doc=d32010informationisamaterial0-2-100823130407-phpapp01&amp;stripped_title=device-design-day-information-is-a-material-5040207" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355" style="display: none !important; "></object><div style="padding:5px 0 12px">View more <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/">presentations</a> from <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/mikek">mikek</a>.</div></div><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; "><b><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; ">

INFORMATION IS A MATERIAL</font></b></font></font></font><p>Good Morning! Thank you very much for inviting me. It's a pleasure to be here.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">ABOUT ME</font></font><br />
First, let me tell you a bit about myself. Most of my professional career over the last 17 years has been spent as a consulting creative director, interaction designer, user researcher and user experience strategy consultant. I started doing Web design in the Jurassic era of the Web, the early 1990s--this is the logo of the first commercial website I designed in 1993. Since then I've worked with probably hundreds of web sites, and I've also helped a number of large electronics companies with their user experience issues.</p>

<p>I sat out the first dotcom crash writing a book based on the work I had been doing. It's a cookbook of user research methods.</p>

<p>And 2001 I co-founded a design and consulting company called Adaptive Path. </p>

<p>I left the Web behind in 2005 and founded a company with Tod E. Kurt called ThingM. We're a small ubiquitous computing company and we design, manufacture and sell ubicomp hardware.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">"SMART THINGS"</font><br />
This talk is based on a chapter from my upcoming book on ubiquitous computing user experience design. It's called "Smart Things" and it's published by Morgan Kaufmann. They have a couple of copies here.</p>

<p>This book is my attempt to create a framework for the different kinds of activities, and the products of those activities, involved in device design, and to create some useful constraints to help move the field forward. Language is a pretty effective way to create conceptual constraints, there's a strong undercurrent of defining terms in it. I try not to invent completely new terms, but to clarify how existing terms apply to the practice of designing ubiquitous computing user experiences, if for no other reason so that there's some shared terminology to use when describing what I do to stakeholders.</p>

<p>The book also has lots of illustrations, techniques and in-depth case studies of a number of commercial products, so don't worry, it's not all about words and concepts. This talk is largely from the wordy/conceptual side of it.</p>

<p><big>PEAK MHZ</big><br />
I want to start by mentioning a curious phenomenon. If you any of you follow developments in microprocessors, you'll notice that the clock speed of today's new CPUs is basically the same as that of CPUs from five years ago. For those of us who used computers in the 80s and 90s, this is very confusing. We watched clock speeds go from 6MHz in 1983 to 3GHz in 2003. During that time, we became used to clock speeds as the measure of power and value in information processing.<br /><br />
But after 20 years during of a logarithmic increase that spanned 3 orders of magnitude, suddenly clock speed abruptly stopped going up in 2004. The industry went from exponential growth in clock speed to no growth, zero growth, in one season. It's like someone slammed the emergency brake.<br /><br />
I call this phenomenon Peak MHz.<br /><br />
Unlike oil, we're not literally running out of CPU clock cycles, but we are seeing a reevaluation of how we understand the value that computers provide, and this has resulted in a shift in the strategy of microprocessor makers. What happened in 2004 was, broadly speaking, that chip manufacturers saw that we were running out of uses for big, energy-hungry, hot processors, and they shifted the game. Since 2004 the competition has shifted from raw CPU to making smaller, cooler, cheaper chips that can do as much work as older chips, while using fewer resources.</p><p></p>

<p>Here's a slide from a talk Paul Otellini, the CEO of Intel, gave last year. Notice that instead of talking about numbers going up, processor manufacturing has become all about pushing numbers down. Instead of competing on doing more with more, they are now competing on doing the same with less. Less power, smaller size, and lower cost.</p>

<p>One of the main effects of this shift is that in addition to pushing the price, size and energy consumption of the latest CPUs down, it also pushes the price of all previous processing technologies down along with it. For example, at the beginning of the Internet era we had the 486 as the state of the art and it cost $1500 in today's dollars. It's the processor that the Web was built for and with. Today, you can buy that same amount of processing power for 50 cents, and it uses only a fraction of the energy. That decrease in price is the same 3 orders of magnitude drop as the increase in speed to 2004. This is not a coincidence, because both are the product of the same underlying technological changes.</p>

<p>When a technology falls in price this much, it opens up enormous possibilities for new products, while creating fundamental changes in society as the new technologies displace established social systems and networks.<br />
Steam engines, for example, lowered the price of harnessing energy by orders of magnitude...and the Industrial Revolution was born as people found all kinds of new uses for mechanical energy. Mechanization suddenly became an option for making and using things where it never existed, or was highly impractical.</p>

<p>You can see similarly transformative effects if you look at what happened when the price of extracting aluminum dropped by two orders of magnitude in the late 19the century, or when electric motors became significantly cheaper and smaller in the 1920s. When something becomes cheap, it quickly joins the toolkit of things we create our world with. It becomes a design material. Sometimes for better and other times for worse.</p>

<p>In the last five years cheap, small processors have drastically lowered the cost of taking information in, evaluating it, manipulating it, rearranging it, and acting on it. It is no longer unthinkable to have an everyday object use an embedded processor to take a small piece of information--say the temperature, or the orientation of a device, or your meeting schedule--and autonomously act on it to help the device do its job better. Information processing is now part of the set of options we can practically consider when designing just about any object.</p>

<p>In other words, information is quickly becoming a material to design with. </p>

<p>This capability of everyday objects to make autonomous decisions and act using arbitrary information is as deep an infrastructural change in our world as electrification, steam power, and mechanical printing. Maybe it's as big of a deal as bricks. Seriously, it's a huge change in how the world works, and we're just at the beginning of it.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">PART 1: DESIGN PROPERTIES OF INFORMATION</font><br />
If information is a design material, what are its material properties? Sure, at some level there are basic information theoretic properties such as bandwidth, noise and complexity, but those are the microscopic properties, the equivalent of basic nuclear forces in material science. They won't help us design a Tickle Me Elmo Extreme, which is a device that's only practical to make using cheap information as a material. What are the MACROSCOPIC properties of information that we can use to design with?</p>

<p></p><ul><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; ">Automatically sense the world</font></span></li></ul><p></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>
It can sense the world. There are thousands sensors that convert states of the world into electrical signals that can be manipulated as information. This also includes sensors that sense human intention. We call these "buttons", "levers", "knobs" and so on.</p></blockquote>

<p></p><ul><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; ">Autonomously act on the world</font></span></li></ul><p></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>
Actuators, which is the generic term for anything that can make a physical change based on input, can be triggered based on information. Thus, information can be used to autonomously affect the world in a way that no previous material was capable of.</p></blockquote>

<p></p><ul><li><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; ">Remember</font></font></li></ul><p></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>
Information can be used to knowledge about the state of the world and act on it later. This could be just a single piece of data, such as what a mechanical thermostat does when it stores the temperature you'd like to keep your house at, or something much more sophisticated, say, storing an image of everything you look at, which is what justin.tv was doing a couple of years ago.</p></blockquote>

<p></p><ul><li>Repeat exactly</li></ul><p></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>
One of the most transformative qualities of information is that it can be duplicated exactly and transmitted flawlessly. This has already changed the music and video industry forever.</p></blockquote>

<blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>But it also means that device behavior can be replicated exactly. We've become acclimated to it, but--stepping back--the idea of near-exact replication in a world full of randomness and uncertainty is a pretty amazing thing, and is a core part of what makes working with information as a material so powerful.</p></blockquote>

<p></p><ul><li>Create complex behavior</li></ul><p></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>
Information enables behavior that's orders of magnitude more complex than possible with just mechanics, at a fraction of the cost. This is a modern small airplane avionics system. It consists of a bunch of small fairly standard computers running special software.</p></blockquote>

<blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>Compare that to a traditional gyroscopic autopilot where every single component is unique, it does very little, and to change its behavior you have to completely reengineer it.</p></blockquote>

<p>If you just thought, "Wait a minute. I know all this and, besides, Norbert Weiner covered this in Cybernetics in 1948." you're right. This is not new. We are intuitively familiar with these properties because we've been using computers for a long time. However, now it is more relevant than ever, because now these same qualities can be distributed throughout the environment in a way that's never been economically feasible before. Weiner was writing from the equivalent position of Leonardo Da Vinci, who could see that mechanized flight was possible, but it was not until four hundred years later that the technology, which included new manufacturing techniques, design techniques, and materials, such as aluminum, made widespread commercial flight practical.<br />
We're now at a point where theory can become reality, and we're now in the position where we actually have to make it happen.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">PART 2: USING INFORMATION AS A MATERIAL</font><br />
So how does treating information as a material affect device design?</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Object-oriented hardware<br /></font>
First, it changes the way that we think about hardware.</p>

<p>Because information can abstract knowledge, it makes it easier to reduce complexity, including the complexity of information technology itself.</p>

<p>Embedded processors make it possible to create an abstraction layer around basic sensing, processing and actuation components to creates building blocks that are meaningful in human terms, rather than just electronic terms. Each block is an atom of functionality that has a CPU and communicates with other blocks over a network. This is the start of object-oriented hardware. What you see here are mostly all prototypes that make it easier to demonstrate this idea, but this is already how many modern devices are constructed. A modern digital device is already more like a small network of interacting components than a monolithic product of a single ground-up engineering process.</p>

<p>From an interaction design standpoint, object oriented hardware means that rather than starting from basic principles of electronics, you get to focus more on what experience you're trying to create, rather than which capacitor to use. Most designers don't smelt their own iron to make things out of steel, or grow their own hardwood trees to make things out of wood. Similarly, object-oriented hardware turns information from a raw material into a design material.</p>

<p>ThingM, my company, makes a set of such atoms of information processing that emit light. Our BlinkM line of smart LED products makes it very easy to put controllable RGB light into arbitrary locations with no electronics knowledge or color theory. Pick some up today at fine electronics retailers worldwide.</p>

<p>OK, end of sales pitch.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Smart things<br /></font>
So what's made with these atoms?<br />
On the next larger scale, we will see new personal tools. Today we have digital pedometers, Internet connected bathroom scales, networked parking meters, and cars that don't stall, but there will be many more. Pick nearly any object, add information to it, and you get a new object. My favorite example of this the adidas_1 shoe, which was put out 5 years ago and then almost immediately discontinued. It has a pressure sensor that it uses to estimate the qualities of the surface being run on an adjusts the heel in between strides to optimize the resiliency regardless of what surface you're running on. The buttons adjusts how it responds. <br />
For me it represents how a small amount of information, carefully deployed can profoundly change an object.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Information as decoration</font><br />
We will see information used as a decorative material, because just as you can use wood to hold up a house or make a sculpture with it, so  information can be used to create incredibly beautiful, profound esthetic experiences. It has already revolutionized music and cinema, but treating it as a permanent material, rather than a medium, creates fantastic new opportunities.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Intelligent environments</font><br />
When taken all together, all of these changes mean that at a large scale, our environment is growing increasingly information-based on a fractal level. Small information devices make large information devices that combine to form environment-sized devices made with information as a core material.</p>

<p>This is the big change that we're going to see happen in the world very soon.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">PART 3: APPLIANCES AND TERMINALS</font><br />
I want to shift gears a bit and talk about two kinds of devices that I believe are important to distinguish in terms of how they use information as a material. These are two different classes of object that are actually made with the same material.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Two kinds of devices</font></font><br />
One class consists of narrow-function devices whose value is primarily in the effect that they create locally. They are made with information to help them to do a small set of specific things much better than similar devices made without information. I call these devices appliances.</p>

<p>The second is the set of general-purpose computing devices are designed to do many things, and they have a wide variety of sensors to maximize the breadth of potential functionality, and much of their value comes from the remote services they provide access to, rather than their local technical capabilities. I call them terminals, because they evoke the tight relationship early terminals had with mainframes. In a sense, terminals are all the same object, but one which comes in a wide variety of sizes.</p>

<p>Both appliances and terminals are made of the same materials, and they have fundamentally identical capabilities, which tends to be confusing. If you know the old Slashdot refrain about Beowulf clusters made from random Linux-based devices, that's a joke about how any device that runs Linux can be used as a general purpose compute platform. Yes, technically that's true, but in the era of cheap processing, it's no longer interesting. It's like joking that you can make an airplane out of melted soda cans because they're both made of aluminum. Yeah. So?</p>

<p>The key difference between the two classes of devices is of course the user experience they create, and that's where the design difference has to come in. If you try to make a terminal experience into an appliance experience, you break its core values as a terminal, and vice versa.</p>

<p>So when starting a project you can ask yourself: am I designing an experience that's more appliance-like or a terminal-like?</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Appliances, terminals and networks</font><br />
Probably the key consideration is how your device is going to work with a network.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Appliance + network = The Internet of Things</font><br />
As a narrow function device whose primary user value is local, appliances do one of two things over a network: they provide telemetry, or they serve as interfaces for a single, simple data feed. </p>

<p>This kind of simple, but highly relevant, data communication is what forms the core of the Internet of Things. In this approach appliances communicate with other appliances and people to create highly focused user experiences that connect physical products to each other in highly efficient, deliberately predetermined ways. Each device becomes more valuable because it is made with information, but only in one specific way.</p>

<p>For example, you can check on the status of your Amazon order because hundreds of devices, hundreds of appliances, are being used to track nearly every single atom Amazon is responsible for. Right now they're using barcodes. Soon these will become RFIDs and after that they'll be active devices, like the FedEx Sensaware smart tag, which has a bunch of sensors, a GPS and the equivalent of a phone in it for sending data about where a package is and what conditions it's traveling in.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Terminal + Network = Service Avatar</font><br />
In the case of terminals, adding networked data has a different effect. </p>

<p>One of the core values of terminals is that they can make the same information accessible through a variety of devices. This has the effect of shifting value from the device, which is a generic container, to the information it carries. The terminal becomes a temporary representation of whatever information-based services it provides access to. It becomes the physical manifestations, what I call the avatar, of the service it represents. It is not the service itself, but people sees "through" it to the service it represents.</p>

<p>For example, I have every expectation that I should be able to pause a movie on one terminal running Netflix and then upause it on another. Why not? It's just a hole in space, a short-term manifestation of a single service I have subscribed to. The value is in the service, not the frame around it.</p>

<p>The design of terminals then is then a challenge to create the most transparent window, and the device design challenge is not in the device, but primarily in the design of the service it's going to create access to.</p>

<p><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">ALL DESIGN IS A NEGOTIATION WITH MATERIALS</font><br />
I feel that these are the kinds of questions we're going to have to ask, and the kinds of relationships we're going to have to examine as we extract device design from the hodgepodge of design techniques that still treat hardware, software and service design as separate entities. </p>

<p>Working with information as a material becomes a negotiation with this combination of technologies treated as a single thing. New materials create both possibilities and problems. We didn't get our flying cars, but nor did we didn't have to fight atomic hydroplaning Soviet battleships.</p>

<p>The most important thing is to engage with the material as a single material that you work with, as a unified set of ideas, rather than separate things that are divided and abdicated to others. If you are here, you create technology. This means that it's your responsibility to understand the properties of information, explore its capabilities, and build tools that make it easier to do the right thing with information than to do the wrong thing. It is our responsibility as designers to do this exploration much more than it is Intel's, or LG's or the government's. They're just mining the raw ore. We're the ones who decide what to make with it.</p>

<p>Thank you!</p><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script><script src="http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&amp;c2=7400849&amp;c3=1&amp;c4=&amp;c5=&amp;c6="></script>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Appliances versus Terminals</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/08/appliances_vers.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010://2.400</id>

    <published>2010-08-10T01:35:43Z</published>
    <updated>2010-08-10T02:17:57Z</updated>

    <summary> table, td { border-color: #600; border-style: solid; vertical-align: baseline; } table { border-width: 0 0 1px 1px; border-spacing: 0; border-collapse: collapse; } td { margin: 0; padding: 4px; border-width: 1px 1px 0 0; background-color: #f8f8f8; } I was doing some writing for my upcoming Device Design Day talk and started to make a list of two common kinds of smart things that I&apos;ve been seeing out in the world. For lack of better terminology, I&apos;m calling these appliances and terminals. I haven&apos;t yet processed all of these ideas, but here is an initial stab at distinguishing two major classes of smart thing. Appliances Terminals Most functionality is Local Remote Technical capabilities Narrow. Technology is only included if it supports core purpose. Broad. Many possible sensors and actuators are included in case they&apos;re needed by a service. Effectiveness High. They&apos;re very good at the small number of things they do. Low. They&apos;re OK at many things. Interface complexity Low. A narrow vision means the interface is relatively straightforward. High. The general-purpose nature of the devices means that the burden of efficacy is on the interface design. A group of them that is interoperating is called... An ensemble A service A...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="appliance" label="appliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="smartobjects" label="smart objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="smartthings" label="smart things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="terminology" label="terminology" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<style type="text/css">

table, td
{
    border-color: #600;
    border-style: solid;
vertical-align: baseline;
}

table
{
    border-width: 0 0 1px 1px;
    border-spacing: 0;
    border-collapse: collapse;
}

td
{
    margin: 0;
    padding: 4px;
    border-width: 1px 1px 0 0;
    background-color: #f8f8f8;
}

</style>

<p>I was doing some writing for my upcoming <a href="http://devicedesignday.com">Device Design Day</a> talk and started to make a list of two common kinds of smart things that I've been seeing out in the world. For lack of better terminology, I'm calling these <em>appliances</em> and <em>terminals</em>. I haven't yet processed all of these ideas, but here is an initial stab at distinguishing two major classes of smart thing.</p>

<table>
<tr>
 <td></td>
 <td><strong>Appliances</strong></td>
 <td><strong>Terminals</strong>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Most functionality is</strong></td>
 <td>Local</td>

 <td>Remote
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Technical capabilities</strong></td>
 <td>Narrow. Technology is only included if it supports core purpose.</td>
 <td>Broad. Many possible sensors and actuators are included in case they're needed by a service.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Effectiveness</strong></td>

 <td>High. They're very good at the small number of things they do.</td>
 <td>Low. They're OK at many things.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Interface complexity</strong></td>
 <td>Low. A narrow vision means the interface is relatively straightforward.</td>
 <td>High. The general-purpose nature of the devices means that the burden of efficacy is on the interface design.
</td>

</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>A group of them that is interoperating is called...</strong></td>
 <td>An ensemble</td>
 <td>A service
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>A single member of the group is called...</strong></td>
 <td>An instrument</td>

 <td>An avatar
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Barriers to interoperability</strong></td>
 <td>High. Unless they're designed to work together from the start</td>
 <td>Theoretically low: they're designed to be avatars of the same service. In practice: high. Cross-avatar UX is still at an infancy.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Distinguished from each other by</strong></td>

 <td>Specific function</td>
 <td>Size
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Strength of links between linked devices</strong></td>
 <td>Low. Connecting appliances that aren't designed to be connected is difficult.</td>
 <td>High. In theory. Theoretically service avatars should easily communicate, but that's not often the case in practice.</td>

</tr>
<tr>
 <td><strong>Examples</strong></td>
 <td>Digital pedometers, Internet connected bathroom scales, networked parking meters, cars, Nike+iPod, cameras.</td>
 <td>smart phones, netbooks, laptops, connected TVs</td>

</tr>
</table>
]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Information as a decorative material, digital jewelry</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/07/information_as_.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010://2.399</id>

    <published>2010-07-22T18:53:44Z</published>
    <updated>2010-07-22T18:56:52Z</updated>

    <summary>Over the last year I&apos;ve spent a lot of time thinking about the esthetic possibilities of information processing (see my recent presentation on information as a material). The relationship between information and creative expression has long been a personal interest (I was doing &quot;computer art&quot; as an undergrad in the late 80s), but lately it&apos;s become a more concerted effort to understand the esthetic design possibilities of data. We are already largely surrounded by information that&apos;s being used as decoration. TVs in bars are just as much a kind of wallpaper as they are sources of knowledge. Similarly, much information visualization is just as much about creating beautiful visual experiences as enlightening analyses. Much modern visualization actually sacrifices informational clarity for visual impact. An easy criticism would be to say that such info porn is the product of frustrated artists forcing their creative visions through a medium that&apos;s not made for it, like poets writing ad copy. I suspect there&apos;s truth to that, but it&apos;s an oversimplification. The reality is that many people are exploring the boundaries of what is required to create meaning using computational tools and for every elegant original visualization there have to be a thousand incomprehensible...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Social effects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="design" label="design" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="informationasmaterial" label="information as material" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Over the last year I've spent a lot of time thinking about the esthetic possibilities of information processing (see my recent presentation on <a href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/07/information_is_1.html">information as a material</a>). The relationship between information and creative expression has long been a personal interest (I was doing "computer art" as an undergrad in the late 80s), but lately it's become a more concerted effort to understand the esthetic design possibilities of data.</p>

<p>We are already largely surrounded by information that's being used as decoration. TVs in bars are just as much a kind of wallpaper as they are sources of knowledge. Similarly, much information visualization is just as much about creating beautiful visual experiences as enlightening analyses. Much modern visualization actually sacrifices informational clarity for visual impact. An easy criticism would be to say that such info porn is the product of frustrated artists forcing their creative visions through a medium that's not made for it, like poets writing ad copy. I suspect there's truth to that, but it's an oversimplification. The reality is that many people are exploring the boundaries of what is required to create meaning using computational tools and for every elegant original visualization there have to be a thousand incomprehensible rats' nests of words, colors and lines.</p>

<p>Moreover, many people (including me) find these data rats' nests visually compelling, which points to the fact that there's something else going on. Data-driven visual and audio projects regularly produce beautiful experiences that have little to do with informational content. Because these experiences are created using computers, there still seems to be an inherent cultural expectation that the information must be meaningful, or the experience is somehow invalid. I can't count how many digital projects I've seen trying to justify their use of computers by linking a lush esthetic experience to some kind of knowledge creation. Their explanations often seem tacked-on.</p>

<p>This kind of pseudo-informational esthetics does a disservice to esthetics and to information.</p>

<p>I want to let go of the fiction that because digital information processing is involved, there has to be some kind of functional end result. There doesn't. We use stone to hold up building, but we also carve beautiful statues from it.</p>

<p>Moreover, in between a material being used purely functionally and purely esthetically there's a vast region where it's doing some of both. This is functional esthetics is the realm of design, and what I decided to explore more concertedly in the last year. ThingM's BlinkMs are a tool for easily creating esthetic experiences from data, treating RGB LEDs as visual manifestations of data bits, and giving people a tool for literally creating Ben Cerveny's <a href="http://vimeo.com/6453613">luminous bath</a> (his metaphor for living in a world of information and divided attention--a set of ideas that's closely linked to Morville's <a href="http://findability.org">Ambient Findability</a>). In addition, they're explicitly designed for pure esthetic expression.</p>

<p>In addition to making BlinkMs we're also exploring what it means to create products that are functional, but use information as a purely decorative element. Things that are not art, but use information (specifically interactive electronics) to make them beautiful, without trying to justify the use of electronics in a functional way. In other words, we're exploring what it means to create a kind of <em>digital jewelry</em> for the home.</p>

<p>We'll be showing some of our ideas very soon. Stay tuned.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Information is a Material (dorkbot talk transcript)</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/07/information_is_1.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.398</id>

    <published>2010-07-09T21:31:10Z</published>
    <updated>2010-07-15T18:33:39Z</updated>

    <summary>Here is the transcript of my dorkbot talk. You can download the complete Powerpoint file from Slideshare or get an 800K PDF with all of the images and a transcript of the talk. Information is a Material Mike Kuniavsky dorkbot San Francisco July 7, 2010 Thank you Karen for inviting me back to present. It&apos;s always a pleasure. First, let me tell you a bit about myself. Most of my professional career over the last 17 years has been spent as a creative director, interaction designer, researcher and user experience strategy consultant, mostly on the Web. I&apos;ve worked with hundreds of companies. Among those I have had extended relationships with these three, the bottom two as a founder. ThingM is my current company. Most of this talk comes from a chapter in my upcoming book, called &quot;Smart Things&quot;, it&apos;s on ubiquitous computing user experience design. It&apos;s available for pre-order now and will ship sometime between the end of August and the middle of September. Peak MHz I want to start by mentioning a curious phenomenon. If you any of you follow developments in microprocessors, you&apos;ll notice that the clock speed of today&apos;s new CPUs is basically the same as that...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Social effects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Here is the transcript of <a href="http://dorkbot.org/dorkbotsf/archive/201007/">my dorkbot talk</a>. You can <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/mikek/information-is-a-material">download the complete Powerpoint file</a> from Slideshare or get an 800K <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/dorkbot_2010_information_is_a_material_0.2.1-2.pdf">PDF with all of the images and a transcript</a> of the talk.<br />
<h2>Information is a Material</h2><br />
Mike Kuniavsky<br />
dorkbot San Francisco<br />
July 7, 2010<br />
Thank you Karen for inviting me back to present. It's always a pleasure.<br />
 <br />
First, let me tell you a bit about myself. Most of my professional career over the last 17 years has been spent as a creative director, interaction designer, researcher and user experience strategy consultant, mostly on the Web. I've worked with hundreds of companies. Among those I have had extended relationships with these three, the bottom two as a founder. ThingM is my current company.</p>

<p>Most of this talk comes from a chapter in my upcoming book, called "Smart Things", it's on ubiquitous computing user experience design. It's available for pre-order now and will ship sometime between the end of August and the middle of September.<br />
<h2>Peak MHz</h2><br />
<img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/peak_mhz.jpg" /><br />
I want to start by mentioning a curious phenomenon. If you any of you follow developments in microprocessors, you'll notice that the clock speed of today's new CPUs is basically the same as that of CPUs from five years ago. For those of us who used computers in the 80s and 90s, this is very confusing. We watched clock speeds go from 6MHz in 1983 to 3GHz in 2003 and became used to clock speeds as the measure of power and value in information processing.<br />
But after 20 years during which clock speed increased by 3 orders of magnitude, suddenly clock speed abruptly stopped going up in 2004. The industry went from exponential growth in clock speed to no growth, zero growth, in one season. It's like someone slammed the emergency brake.</p>

<p>I call this phenomenon Peak MHz.</p>

<p>Unlike oil, we're not literally running out of CPU clock cycles, but we are seeing a reevaluation of how we understand the value that computers provide, and this has resulted in a shift in the strategy of microprocessor makers. What happened in 2004 was, broadly speaking, that chip manufacturers saw that we were running out of uses for big, energy-hungry, hot processors, and they shifted the game. Since 2004 the competition has shifted from raw CPU to making smaller, cooler, cheaper chips that can do as much work as older chips, while using fewer resources.</p>

<p>Here's a slide from a talk Paul Otellini, the CEO of Intel, gave last year. Notice that instead of talking about numbers going up, processor manufacturing has become all about pushing numbers down. Instead of competing on doing more with more, they are now competing on doing more with less.</p>

<p>One of the main effects of this shift is that in addition to pushing the price and energy consumption of the latest CPUs down, it also pushes the price of all previous processing technologies down along with it. For example, at the beginning of the Internet era we had the 486 as the state of the art and it cost $1500 in today's dollars. It's the processor that the Web was built for and with. Today, you can buy that same amount of processing power for 50 cents, and it uses only a fraction of the energy. That is the same 3 orders of magnitude drop as the increase in speed to 2004. This is not unrelated, because both are the product of the same underlying technological changes.</p>

<p>Here's another Otellini slide. It's essentially saying "look, we're making the same thing smaller and cheaper every year."</p>

<p>When a technology falls in price this much, it opens up enormous possibilities and creates fundamental changes in society. Steam engines similarly lowered the price of harnessing energy by orders of magnitude...and the Industrial Revolution was born as people found all kinds of new uses for readily-available mechanical energy.</p>

<p>You can see similarly transformative effects if you look at what happened when the price of extracting aluminum dropped by two orders of magnitude in the late 19the century, or when electric motors became significantly cheaper and smaller in the 1920s. When something becomes cheap, it quickly joins the toolkit of things we create our world with. It becomes a design material. Sometimes for better and other times for worse.</p>

<p>Because cheap processors have drastically lowered the cost of taking information in, evaluating it, manipulating it, rearranging it, and acting on it, information is very quickly becoming a material to design with. It is no longer unthinkable to have an everyday object use a small embedded processor take a small piece of information--say the temperature, or the orientation of a device, or your meeting schedule--and autonomously act on it.</p>

<p>This capability of everyday objects to make autonomous decisions and act using arbitrary information is as deep an infrastructural change in our world as electrification, steam power, and mechanical printing. Maybe it's as big of a deal as bricks. Seriously, it's a huge change in how the world works, and we're just at the beginning of it.<br />
<h2>Design Properties of Information</h2>If information is a design material, what are its material properties? Sure, at some level there are the basic information theoretic properties such as bandwidth, noise and complexity, but those are the microscopic properties, the equivalent of basic nuclear forces in material science. They won't help us design a Tickle Me Elmo Extreme, which is a device that's only practical to make using cheap information as a material. What are the MACROSCOPIC properties of information that we can use as designers and artists?<br />
<h2>Automatically sense the world</h2>It can sense the world. There are thousands sensors that convert states of the world into electrical signals that can be manipulated as information. This also includes sensors that sense human intention. We call these "buttons", "levers", "knobs" and so on.<br />
<h2>Autonomously act on the world</h2>Actuators, which is the generic term for anything that can make a physical change based on input, can be triggered based on information. Thus, information can be used to autonomously affect the world in a way that no previous material was capable of.<br />
<h2>Remember</h2>Information can store be used to some knowledge about the state of the world that can be acted on later. This could be just a single piece of data, such as what a mechanical thermostat does when it stores the temperature you'd like to keep your house at, or something much more sophisticated, say, storing an image of everything you look at, which is what justin.tv was doing a couple of years ago.<br />
<h2>Repeat exactly</h2>One of the most transformative qualities of information is that it can be duplicated exactly and transmitted flawlessly. This has already changed the music and video industry forever. </p>

<p>Image: UPI: http://www.upi.com/enl-win/9b95da78f449e1a5dc28a05efc4d55a4/</p>

<p>But it also means that device behavior can be replicated exactly. We've become acclimated to it, but--stepping back--the idea of near-exact replication in a world full of randomness and uncertainty is a pretty amazing thing, and is a core part of what makes working with information as a material so powerful.</p>

<p>Image: N-Trophy, 2000-2003, Kelly Heaton, Feldman Gallery: http://www.feldmangallery.com/pages/exhsolo/exhhea03.html</p>

<h2>Create complex behavior</h2>Information enables behavior that's orders of magnitude more complex than possible with just mechanics, but at a fraction of the cost. This is a modern small airplane avionics system. It consists of a bunch of small fairly standard computers running special software.

<p>Image found on: http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=51435</p>

<p>Compare that to a traditional gyroscopic autopilot where every single component is unique, it does very little, and to change its behavior you have to completely reengineer it.</p>

<h2>Isn't this stating the obvious?</h2>If you just thought, "You're just saying things we already know, and Norbert Weiner's Cybernetics covered much of this 1948!" you're right. We're all intimately familiar with computers, so many of these qualities seem obvious. Weiner certainly predicted a lot of this first, but he was writing from theory, and most of our experience is with general purpose computers that were designed when information was still a pretty expensive material to work with. We're crossing into a new era of direct, widespread embedding of information as a key component of wide variety of special purpose devices, so examining these ideas is now more important than ever.

<p>Now that we've broken information as a material down to components, what does this mean for the design of devices?</p>

<h2>Object-oriented hardware</h2>
Let's start small. Because information can abstract knowledge, it makes it easier to reduce complexity, including the complexity of information technology itself.
Embedded processors make it possible to create an abstraction layer around basic sensing, processing and actuation components to creates building blocks that are meaningful in human terms, rather than just electronic terms. Each block has a CPU and communicates with other blocks over a network. Rather than starting from basic principles of electronics, you as a designer or artist will soon be able to focus on what you're trying to accomplish, rather than which capacitor to use. You don't have to smelt your own iron to make things out of metal, or grow your own wood to make things out of wood. Similarly, object-oriented hardware will turn information from a raw material into a design material.

<p>What you see here are mostly all prototypes, but these devices are the atoms of information as a material, the blocks from which other information devices will be made.</p>

<p>Most images from Jacob Nielsen's PhD, <a href="phd.jacobnielsen.net/files/Thesis%20final%20rettet%20adobe.pdf">"User¬Configurable Modular Robotics"</a> (9.2MB PDF)<br />
Also <a href="http://littlebits.cc">LittleBits</a> from Bdeir, Hoefs, et al.<br />
Tinkerkit from Tinker.it<br />
<a href="http://www.buglabs.net">Bug Labs</a></p>

<h2>BlinkM</h2>
ThingM, my company, makes a set of such atoms that emit light. Our <a href="http://blinkm.thingm.com">BlinkM</a> line of smart LED products makes it very easy to put controllable RGB light into arbitrary locations with no electronics knowledge or color theory. Burning Man is around the corner, pick some up today at fine retailers worldwide.

<p>OK, end of sales pitch.</p>

<h2>Smart Things</h2>
So what's made with these atoms?
On the next larger scale, we will see new personal tools. Today we have digital pedometers, Internet connected bathroom scales, networked parking meters, and cars that don't stall, but there will be many more. Pick nearly any object, add information to it, and you get a new object. My favorite example of this the adidas_1 shoe, which was put out 5 years ago and then almost immediately discontinued. It has a pressure sensor that it uses to estimate the qualities of the surface being run on an adjusts the heel in between strides to optimize the resiliency regardless of what surface you're running on. The buttons adjusts how it responds. 
For me it represents how a small amount of information, carefully deployed can profoundly change an object.

<h2>The Internet of Things</h2>
Making things with information makes it easy for devices to provide continuous telemetry to each other, in what's being called M2M or machine to machine communication. That capability of information is at the core of the Internet of Things. You can check on the status of your Amazon order because there are hundreds of devices that are automatically tracking nearly every single atom Amazon is responsible for using barcodes. Soon these will become RFIDs and after that they'll be active devices, like the <a href="http://www.senseaware.com">FedEx Sensaware</a> smart tag, which has a bunch of sensors, a GPS and the equivalent of a phone in it for sending data about where a package is and what conditions it's traveling in.

<h2>Information as Decoration</h2>
Cheap processing also creates the opportunity to use information as a decorative material. A lot of data visualization today is as much about decoration as it is about information analysis or communication, and that trend is only going to continue. Information is no different a material than any other material. Wood can hold up a house, or you can make a sculpture with it. Information can be used to create incredibly beautiful, profound esthetic experiences. It has already revolutionized music and cinema, but treating as a permanent material, rather than a medium, creates fantastic new opportunities.

<p>Shelf by <a href="http://www.nodesign.net">Jean-Louis Frechin</a><br />
"Enteractive" floor by <a href="http://electroland.net">Electroland</a> <br />
Buddy Beads by <a href="http://www.ruthkikin.com">Ruth Kikin-Gil></a></p>

<h2>Intelligent Environments</h2>
When taken all together, all of these changes mean that at a large scale, our environment is growing increasingly information-based on a fractal level. Small information devices make large information devices that combine to form whole environments made with information as a core material.

<p>From Herman-Miller's <a href="http://www.hermanmiller.com/MarketFacingTech/hmc/global/pdf_files/Always_Building.pdf">"Always Building"</a> (5.4MB PDF)<br />
TU Delft's <a href="http://www.interactive-environments.nl">Interactive Environment class</a><br />
<a href="http://www.haque.co.uk">Usman Haque's</a> Sky Ear</p>

<h2>All Design is a Negotiation with Materials</h2>
Where will this lead? Well, just as we didn't get our flying cars, but we didn't have to fight atomic hydroplaning Soviet battleships, working with information as a material is a negotiation with the technology the material represents. New materials create both possibilities and problems. The most important thing is to engage with the material as a material that you work with, rather than something you abdicate to others. If you are here at dorkbot, you make things with technology. This means that it's your responsibility to understand the properties of information, explore its capabilities, and build tools that make it easier to do the right thing with information than to do the wrong thing. It is our responsibility to do these things much more than it is Intel's, or LG's or the government's.
So, please, when you do strange things with electricity, or with information, do it knowing that you are using a material we barely understand. Be bold, be careful, and share your results.

<p>Thank you.</p>

<p>[July 10, 2010 update: added links to most of the references]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Peak MHz</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/07/peak_mhz.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.397</id>

    <published>2010-07-05T02:13:56Z</published>
    <updated>2010-07-15T18:31:54Z</updated>

    <summary>In preparation for my upcoming Dorkbot talk, I put together this chart of CPU speeds from 1980 until today: This chart demonstrates that we hit the era of what I&apos;m calling Peak MHz in about 2004. That&apos;s the point when processor speed effectively peaked as chip manufacturers began competing along other dimensions. Those other dimensions--energy efficiency, size and cost--are driving ubiquitous computing, as their chips become more efficient, smaller and cheaper, thus making them increasingly easier to include into everyday objects. For those who grew up during the 1990-2004 era, this can be quite confusing, since CPU speed was how the value of computing devices was commonly measured. Now that is shifting to how that power is applied. In other words, it&apos;s gone from being a discussion of raw power, to how that power is applied (for a similar phenomenon, see the superbike top speed competition among motorcycle manufacturers, which ended with the 2000 Suzuki Hayabusa agreement)....</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Pictures" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="peakmhz" label="peak mhz" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="socialeffects" label="social effects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>In preparation for my <a href="http://dorkbot.org/dorkbotsf/archive/201007/">upcoming Dorkbot talk</a>, I put together this chart of CPU speeds from 1980 until today:</p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/peak_mhz.jpg" /></p>

<p>This chart demonstrates that we hit the era of what I'm calling Peak MHz in about 2004. That's the point when processor speed effectively peaked as chip manufacturers began competing along other dimensions. Those other dimensions--energy efficiency, size and cost--are driving ubiquitous computing, as their chips become more efficient, smaller and cheaper, thus making them increasingly easier to include into everyday objects.<br />
For those who grew up during the 1990-2004 era, this can be quite confusing, since CPU speed was how the value of computing devices was commonly measured. Now that is shifting to how that power is applied. In other words, it's gone from being a discussion of raw power, to how that power is applied (for a similar phenomenon, see the superbike top speed competition among motorcycle manufacturers, which ended with the 2000 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Hayabusa#Top_speed_limited_by_agreement">Suzuki Hayabusa agreement</a>).</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>&quot;Information is a Material&quot;: July 7 dorkbot SF Talk abstract</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/information_is.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.396</id>

    <published>2010-06-28T19:47:38Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-30T01:20:26Z</updated>

    <summary>I&apos;ve again been invited to present at dorkbot in San Francisco. Dorkbot is where I first publicly talked about magic as a ubicomp metaphor in 2006. Here&apos;s the abstract to my July 7, 2010 presentation: Information is a material We have passed the era of Peak MHz. The race in CPU development is now for smaller, cheaper, and less power-hungry processors. As the price of powerful CPUs approaches that of basic components (there are fast CPUs now that cost less than some LEDs, for example), how information processing is used fundamentally changes. When information processing is this cheap, it becomes a material with which to design the world, like plastic, iron, and wood. This vision is the opposite of cloud computing and it argues that most information processing in the future will not be in some distant data center, but immediately present in our environment, distributed throughout the world, embedded in things we don&apos;t think of as computers. This talk will discuss What it means to treat information as a material.The properties of information as a design material.The design possibilities created by information as a material.How information as a material enables The Internet of Things, object oriented hardware, smart materials,...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Social effects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>I've again been invited to present at <a href="http://www.dorkbot.org/dorkbotsf/">dorkbot</a> in San Francisco. Dorkbot is where I first publicly talked about <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2006/10/the_coming_age.html">magic as a ubicomp metaphor</a> in 2006.</p>

<p>Here's the abstract to my July 7, 2010 presentation:</p>

<p><big><big>Information is a material</big></big></p>

<p>We have passed the era of Peak MHz. The race in CPU development is now for smaller, cheaper, and less power-hungry processors. As the price of powerful CPUs approaches that of basic components (there are fast CPUs now that cost less than some LEDs, for example), how information processing is used fundamentally changes. When information processing is this cheap, it becomes a material with which to design the world, like plastic, iron, and wood.</p>

<p>This vision is the opposite of cloud computing and it argues that most information processing in the future will not be in some distant data center, but immediately present in our environment, distributed throughout the world, embedded in things we don't think of as computers. </p>

<p>This talk will discuss</p>

<ul><li>What it means to treat information as a material.</li><li>The properties of information as a design material.</li><li>The design possibilities created by information as a material.</li><li>How information as a material enables The Internet of Things, object oriented hardware, smart materials, ubiquitous computing, and intelligent environments.</li></ul>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 6, Information Shadows, Part 6: WineM, an example</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_13.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.395</id>

    <published>2010-06-11T16:50:27Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:19Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 6 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. (Part 1) (Part 2) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Earlier chapters in this series: Chapter 3, Chapter 1 Citations to references can be found here. Chapter 6: Information shadows Part 6: WineM, an example of design with information shadow Figure 6-10. ThingM&apos;s WineM smart wine rack (Photo by Tod E. Kurt) In 2007, my company, ThingM, used these ideas to design a smart wine rack (Figure 6-10). It was created to demonstrate one endpoint of a service based on wine information shadows. Every bottle of wine in it has an RFID tag (Figure 6-4), with an RFID reader in every cell of the rack. The rack, in turn, connects to an online information shadow service. This service aggregates wine information from the Internet and all of the racks that are connected to it. [Footnote: As this was a proof of concept, we implemented only bare-bones functionality and worked with a wine data aggregator (Inertia Beverage) to verify that we could...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="informationshadows" label="information shadows" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="winem" label="winem" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="writing" label="writing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 6 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. (<a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_8.html">Part 1</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_9.html">Part 2</a>) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
Earlier chapters in this series: <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_4.html">Chapter 3</a>, <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/04/smart_things_ch.html">Chapter 1</a>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>
<h2>Chapter 6: Information shadows</h2>
<h3>Part 6: WineM, an example of design with information shadow</h3>
<img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_winem_fullheight_small.jpg" />

<p>Figure 6-10. ThingM's WineM smart wine rack (Photo by Tod E. Kurt)</p>

<p>In 2007, my company, ThingM, used these ideas to design a smart wine rack (Figure 6-10). It was created to demonstrate one endpoint of a service based on wine information shadows. Every bottle of wine in it has an RFID tag (Figure 6-4), with an RFID reader in every cell of the rack. The rack, in turn, connects to an online information shadow service. This service aggregates wine information from the Internet and all of the racks that are connected to it. [Footnote: As this was a proof of concept, we implemented only bare-bones functionality and worked with a wine data aggregator (Inertia Beverage) to verify that we could get appropriate information in a production environment.]</p>

<p>When someone associates an RFID with a specific wine bottle, the service would connect it to all of the other wines of the same type. Many wine management services can already  analyze a wine collection and recommend wines resembling those in the collection. Our service went one step further: every bottle could serve as a subscription to a data feed from the winery and to a social network of enthusiasts with similar interests. A winery could have a sale for existing owners, or recent drinkers, of its wines. Then, every rack that contained a bottle of that wine would get a message, and light up the wine in a specific color, or send a text message that said "your 2004 Domaine Roger Perrin Chateauneuf-du-Pape has mail!"</p>

<p>WineM is an experiment to understand how the potential of information shadows can be expressed in a good user experience. It is designed to keep the user experience focused on the experience of choosing and drinking wine. It minimizes the presence of a full-purpose computer while still providing the full power of Internet information exchange.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_winem_control_small.jpg" /><br />
Figure 6-11. WineM control panel (prototyped on a Nokia 770 tablet)</p>

<p>For example, the interface is a faceted classification browser (Figure 6-12). Every click adds another constraint to the search set and lights up the appropriate bottles in the rack. Thus, it's possible to organize the wine not just by year or grape, but also by current market price or number of bottles in stock (or all of the above).</p>

<p>Hallmarks took the difficult process of identifying the manufacturer of a given piece of flatware by its style and instead made it a matter of matching a small stamp to pictures in a catalogue. Similarly, this kind of information exploration would have been very difficult with a traditional wine rack. However, once the bottles had their information shadows stitched to them using RFIDs and a simple database connected to the massive amounts of wine information online, it was relatively easy.</p>

<p><b>Next month: Chapter 8, Service Avatars</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 6, Information Shadows, Part 5: Design with Information Shadows</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_12.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.394</id>

    <published>2010-06-09T22:34:24Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:19Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 5 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. (Part 1) (Part 2) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Earlier chapters in this series: Chapter 3, Chapter 1 Citations to references can be found here. Chapter 6: Information shadows Part 5: Design with Information Shadows Designing with information shadows means using devices, such as RFIDs, that may have specific, limited functionality and capabilities. However, as with the FedEx example, designing with information shadows often requires global service design. Information shadow user experience design must simultaneously consider (1) what happens when every object is automatically tracked and (2) how to associate those objects with all available digital information about them. A systematic approach to user experience design can reduce the possibility vertigo of multiplying two such nearly infinite sets. Despite the speed and novelty of changing technologies, people&apos;s underlying needs and desires change slowly. What has changed is that a new powerful tool is now available to address those needs. The use of information shadows is still in its infancy, but...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="informationshadows" label="information shadows" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="userexperience" label="user experience" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="writing" label="writing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 5 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. (<a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_8.html">Part 1</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_9.html">Part 2</a>) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
Earlier chapters in this series: <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_4.html">Chapter 3</a>, <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/04/smart_things_ch.html">Chapter 1</a>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>
<h2>Chapter 6: Information shadows</h2>
<h3>Part 5: Design with Information Shadows</h3>
Designing with information shadows means using devices, such as RFIDs, that may have specific, limited functionality and capabilities. However, as with the FedEx example, designing with information shadows often requires global service design. Information shadow user experience design must simultaneously consider (1) what happens when every object is automatically tracked and (2) how to associate those objects with all available digital information about them.

<p>A systematic approach to user experience design can reduce the possibility vertigo of multiplying two such nearly infinite sets. Despite the speed and novelty of changing technologies, people's underlying needs and desires change slowly. What has changed is that a new powerful tool is now available to address those needs.</p>

<p>The use of information shadows is still in its infancy, but several interesting design properties of information shadows have emerged:<br />
<ul><li>They simplify the design of certain kinds of devices.</li><li>They allow designers to treat dedicated devices like physical embodiments of Web services and create mashups.</li><li>They allow mass customization of experiences without mass customization of objects.</li><li>They allow devices to be self-disclosing for disposal and recycling.</li><li>They blur the line between devices and services.</li><li>They create novel, pleasurable, entertaining experiences.</li></ul><br />
These are described in more detail below.<br />
<h3>Information shadows simplify devices</h3><br />
When an object no longer has to display all of the human-readable metadata needed by users, its design can be simpler. The labels on bags of chocolate chips only have room for one or two recipe suggestions. Now, the chocolate chips can have their own cookbook, and the label only to point to it. Similarly, devices can be simplified down to the single thing they do best. You might want to use a pedometer to track miles walked each day for a week. The pedometer interface can be quite minimal if devices—such as a mobile phone—can access that pedometer's information shadow. The pedometer itself just needs a power button, status indicator, and walking progress display. Other devices—with larger screens and more computing power—can focus on helping users make sense of information about their exercise plans.<br />
<h3>Physical/Network mashups</h3><blockquote>Ubicomp mashups attempt to move computation off the desktop and integrate it with the artifacts of everyday life. They extend beyond the Web and combine the functionality of both software and hardware components. (Hartmann et al, 2008)</blockquote><br />
Many Web-based services have published API (application programming interfaces) that allow other services to use their information and computational capabilities in novel ways. Google Maps, the classic of the genre, allows developers to layer information over map images that Google provides. Physical/network mashups create novel experiences that merge the power of simple, lightweight devices with the power of existing Web services.<br />
<img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_tweet-a-watt_small.jpg" /><br />
Figure 6-9. Tweet-a-watt (Fried, 2009)</p>

<p>Fried and Torrone's 2009 Tweet-a-Watt project (Figure 6-9) is one such mashup. It posts electricity use to Twitter, using the same API that's normally carries people's Twitter posts about their own activities. But Twitter can easily broadcast information about devices, making hour-by-hour updates about energy use accessible to humans and readable by software. </p>

<p>Ubicomp device user experience designers can hook up information about objects to data sources on the Internet using the same APIs and protocols used by web site mashups. [Footnote: Bleecker (2005) takes it further, and defines the term blogject to describe devices that act like people on the Internet. They can blog, they can post to Twitter, they can reply to human conversation. For Bleecker, "blogjects become first-class a-list producers of conversations in the same way that human bloggers do—by starting, maintaining and being critical attractors in conversations around topics that have relevance and meaning to others who have a stake in that discussion."] These physical/network mashups build on existing web design methods and provide a familiar set of web concepts to describe how physical objects and online information can interact.<br />
<h3>Mass customization</h3><br />
The digital information shadow associated with an object is much easier to change at whim than that object's physical form. Mass customization of experiences gets much easier when the majority of the customization happens digitally. For example, the WebKinz toy line (See Chapter 7) connects toys that physically differ only slightly (like Cabbage Patch dolls of an earlier generation), but have rich online personalities.</p>

<p>Conversely, merging information shadows with rapid manufacturing techniques such as 3D printing allows for the instantiation of data in a physical, purchased object. Materialise, a Belgian 3D printing firm, sells a line of intricate designer lamps for the high-end furniture market (under the .MGX brand). Each lamp is individually printed. When first introduced, every lamp came with a disk containing a CAD file describing how to recreate that lamp. It's the lamp's DNA and part of its information shadow. Since Materialise keeps copies of the files, the lamps are, in effect, immortal: if a lamp is broken, they can print another one. Each lamp can be unique, or replicated as often as a buyer wants.</p>

<p>What happens to "mass production" when an object's physical form is based on a unique digital file? In a sense, we can now go back to a pre-Industrial Revolution era of unique objects. But now the uniqueness stems not from the imperfections and unpredictability of hand craft processes, but from a manufactured object’s relationship with its informational shadow.<br />
<h3>Smart disposal and recycling</h3><br />
Because information shadows can contain any kind of information, they can contain instructions for how to dispose of the object they shadow. [Footnote: I first heard this idea in a lecture by Bruce Sterling. In Sterling (1999) he writes "Smart garbage doesn't fester in darkness, ignorance and denial. It becomes a resource."] They can self-disclose not just what information they collect and use (as per Greenfield, 2006), but how to fix, disassembled and recycle them.</p>

<p>For example, information about the materials from which the object is made can be mashed up with a database of municipal recycling rules to generate instructions for how to locally recycle the object. San Francisco—where I live—has an advanced recycling program that automatically distinguishes between many materials. However, I still don't know if I can put a steel car part, Styrofoam or shoes with a "recycle" logo on the sole in my plastic recycling bin. The rules of what is acceptable, and how to prepare it, change regularly. An information shadow mashup linked to each object could clarify that question instantly, directing me to take my esoteric recyclable to a specific location or to treat it in a specific way.</p>

<p>Similarly, complex items, such as consumer electronics or robotic toys, are difficult to recycle because they require too much disassembly and contain unknown materials. For the municipality, these objects' information shadows could contain disassembly instructions and complete materials lists. With more information, city systems could know what do to with old toys besides sending them to the dump.<br />
<h3>Information shadows enable new kinds of services</h3><br />
Note: See Chapter 8 for a more general examination of this topic.</p>

<p>By giving objects unique identifiers, shadows allow those objects to become the subjects of services that track them and interact with them. Everyday objects can become subscription services. [Footnote: Again Sterling got here first. In Sterling (2001) he describes a furniture subscription system that creates one-off customized furniture on demand.]<br />
 <br />
In the days before the breakup of AT&T, Americans didn't own their own telephones. They leased them from the phone company. Although "Ma Bell" limited the range of phone choices, the phone company was required to repair broken equipment. The company could arrange update the whole system systematically and thoroughly, whenever it wanted. Though not ideal, the system had its benefits. It was also nearly impossible to replicate without the resources of an enormous company like AT&T. Information shadows could facilitate similar—but not so resource-intensive—for many other kinds of products and consumers.</p>

<p>For example, a shoe company could sell sustainable shoes by subscription. The shoe easily disassembles, yet is sturdy and comfortable. Buying the shoe means buying into a subscription for that shoe. As one part wears out, or as fashions change, the shoe can be disassembled, and mailed to a central warehouse, which mails back a replacement part. The shoe's information shadow says exactly which replacement it requires.</p>

<p>More directly, unique item-level identification allows for services that determine authenticity and trace provenance. In some parts of Africa, 30% of pharmaceuticals are counterfeit. mPedigree is using unique identifiers, printed under a scratch-off material, to identify authentic drugs (Schenker, 2008). Sending the number by text message to a trusted central location checks the authenticity—and then the expiration date—of the pharmaceutical. If the identification number is valid and the medicine's shelf-life has not expired, the system sends back another text message with a simple affirmation. Similarly, a purchaser can use the information shadow of a grocery item to trace its progress back to the farm where it was made and verify whether their farming practices are sustainable and humane. Similarly, an expensive designer handbag can be quickly authenticated.</p>

<p>The service possibilities of information shadows are enormous.<br />
<h3> Entertainment</h3><br />
Once an object is identifiable and trackable, it can become a token in a game. One of the earliest such games was "Where's George?" (wheresgeorge.com), which traces the passage of one dollar bills across the world using the bills' serial numbers. Many people find it fascinating to see where the bill they're holding had been and where bills they entered into the system have gone.</p>

<p>That is, of course, just the tip of the iceberg. Mediamatic, a technology design organization, challenged a group of designers at the PICNIC 08 conference in Amsterdam to create social games using RFID tags that every conference participant was given (Mediamatic, 2008). After a week of hacking, the 30 people in the workshop had created ten functioning games (Table 6-1).</p>

<p>Table 6-1. Games developed usink ikTag RFID tags in a week of hacking by groups at the PICNIC 08 conference. The text is from a flyer printed by Mediamatic, the organizer of the hacking week.<br />
<blockquote><ul><li>ikRun. Run from the conference to the PICNIC Club and record your fastest time and finishing photo. Scan your ikTag at the start next to the E-Art dome, scan again to finish and win!</li><li>Friend Drink Station. Free drinks for new friends! Mediamatic offers a free drink and a new friendship in the network. Just swipe your ikTag and push the button.</li><li>Department. Use the ikTag to see what the Department of Information Security & Privacy knows about you. The DISP is buying privacy and selling security.</li><li>ikCam. Swipe your ikTag to add your portrait to your profile. Or gather up to 20 friends with ikTags and make shapshots!</li><li>Breathalyzer. Use the ikTag, blow into the straw and test your alcohol intake. The outcome will be published on your profile. Compare your drinking skills with others at PICNIC.</li><li>ikWin! Use your ikTag to challenge someone in a battle for Google ranking. Two scissor lifts will go up, the more hits, the higher you go.</li><li>Mobile Massage Couch. Sit down on the two seater with a new friend, use your ikTag to get a free massage. You can win bonus time as a gift from the crowd.</li><li>DuckRace. 2 players start their race cars with their ikTag. The race track is based on your profile and network. The audience will influence your race car with their ikTag.</li><li>Breedrs. Drop your ikTag in the Breedrs Pond and see it evolve into a creature, with DNA based on your profile. Is this love or war?</li><li>Vbird. Contact the Vbird with your ikTag, help it fly, meet new friends and find the interactive film in your profile.</li></ul></blockquote><br />
These games represent a completely new genre of play, one that mixes physical objects (like scissor lifts, couches and breathalyzers) with online information (profiles and Google ranks) and computation. The possibilities implicit in this one week exercise are fascinating and exciting. They imply that information shadows can touch all aspects of everyday life.</p>

<p><b>Tomorrow: Chapter 3, Part 6: WineM</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 6, Information Shadows, Part 4: the Internet of Things</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_11.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.393</id>

    <published>2010-06-08T20:46:27Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:19Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 4 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. (Part 1) (Part 2) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Earlier chapters in this series: Chapter 3, Chapter 1 Citations to references can be found here. Chapter 6: Information shadows Part 4: The Internet of Things The Center&apos;s mission is to create an &quot;Internet of Things&quot; that will: merge the centuries old &quot;network of atoms&quot; (the production, distribution, sale, use &amp; disposal of products) with the &quot;network of bits&quot; (the Internet). - Kevin Ashton, executive director of the MIT Auto-ID Center, 1999 The concept of information shadows is intertwined with the &quot;The Internet of Things,&quot; a term coined by the staff of the MIT Auto-Id Center in 1999. The familiar Internet of bits is of course still made of things, but these things are primarily computational devices (routers, modems, etc.) whose purpose is to store, manipulate, and transmit data. These things generate the form of the Internet, not its content. People experience the Internet, however, through its content. This content, for...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="informationshadows" label="information shadows" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="internetofthings" label="Internet of Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="writing" label="writing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 4 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. (<a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_8.html">Part 1</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_9.html">Part 2</a>) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
Earlier chapters in this series: <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_4.html">Chapter 3</a>, <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/04/smart_things_ch.html">Chapter 1</a>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>
<h2>Chapter 6: Information shadows</h2>
<h3>Part 4: The Internet of Things</h3>
<blockquote>
The Center's mission is to create an "Internet of Things" that will: merge the centuries old "network of atoms" (the production, distribution, sale, use & disposal of products) with the "network of bits" (the Internet).

<p>- Kevin Ashton, executive director of the MIT Auto-ID Center, 1999<br />
</blockquote><br />
The concept of information shadows is intertwined with the "The Internet of Things," a term coined by the staff of the MIT Auto-Id Center in 1999. The familiar Internet of bits is of course still made of things, but these things are primarily computational devices (routers, modems, etc.) whose purpose is to store, manipulate, and transmit data. These things generate the form of the Internet, not its content. People experience the Internet, however, through its content. This content, for now, exists for most people only through general-purpose digital devices such as laptops and mobile phones. [Footnote: Even specialized net-aware devices (Game consoles, ATMs, home security systems, etc.) are clearly presented as digital products whose connection to an electronic network does not come as a surprise.]</p>

<p>In 1999, MIT Auto-Id Center's vision was that non-electronic things should also have digital identities. The Center's main focused was automatic identification [Footnote: Leading to a number of visionary proposals for how such identification would work (Brock, 2001-1, 2001-2, etc.).], rather than the digital social life such identification creates for things. Information shadows, however, enable more symmetrical experiences than just identifying non-digital objects, as economically and socially powerful as that is. The Internet of Things has by now taken on a broader meaning. It describes the collection of all objects with information shadows, whether those objects' relationship to the Internet is asymmetrical (as in the case of identification and tracking) or symmetrical.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_SenseAware_small.jpg" /><br />
Figure 6-8. FedEx SenseAware (Courtesy FedEx)</p>

<p>The possibilities created by feedback between an object and its information shadow are immense. A shipped object can conceal its actual destination, only revealing the next step in its path to a shipper and dynamically adjusting its route if diverted. It can validate its authenticity and refuse to function if the person holding it is unauthorized, with the list stored in its information shadow. A FedEx's SenseAware smart tag (Figure 6-8), for example, reports not just the location of its package, but also the environmental conditions of its transfer. As it travels, it adds its location, temperature, pressure, humidity, and whether (and when) its box has been opened to its information shadow. In a more speculative scenario, a SenseAware-equipped box could theoretically reroute itself if storage conditions were likely to have caused its contents to spoil. [Footnote: FedEx does not currently offer this service. This scenario is speculative only.]</p>

<p>Despite its roots in shipping, an Internet of Things could use information shadows in a wide variety of ways. A motorcycle could have a strain gauge built into its chain, and store both the status of the chain, and the specifications for a replacement, in its information shadow. When the chain was stretched to the point where it needed replacement (an important part of motorcycle maintenance that can lead to very dangerous conditions if not performed), the motorcycle could log that state in its information shadow. This, in turn, could trigger an alert on the motorcycle owners' phone and on the motorcycle's dashboard. The repair shop could interrogate the motorcycle for the kind of chain last used and the chain performance characteristics indicated based on sensor data taken since the last replacement.</p>

<p><br />
<b>Tomorrow: Chapter 3, Part 5: Design with Information Shadows</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 6, Information Shadows, Part 3: Point-at things</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_10.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.392</id>

    <published>2010-06-07T17:12:06Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:19Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 3 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. (Part 1) (Part 2)The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Earlier chapters in this series: Chapter 3, Chapter 1 Citations to references can be found here. Chapter 6: Information shadows Part 3: Point-at things Systems of information shadows are created by promoting standard methods for associating a physical object and information about it. Experience designer Tom Coates coined the term point-at things while compiling ways to organize BBC&apos;s program directory. [Footnote: See (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2000) for the information architecture standard the BBC produced as part of the process described in this section.] In that project, he realized that &quot;once you [uniquely identify] a programme episode then something really significant happens—you can give it a name, make it addressable, you can—for the first time point at it. Better still, you can move from pointing at something to glueing handles onto it. And once you have such a handle, then you can pick up the programme and throw it around and stick labels...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="userexperience" label="user experience" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="writing" label="writing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 3 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. (<a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_8.html">Part 1</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_9.html">Part 2</a>)The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
Earlier chapters in this series: <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_4.html">Chapter 3</a>, <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/04/smart_things_ch.html">Chapter 1</a>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>
<h2>Chapter 6: Information shadows</h2>
<h3>Part 3: Point-at things</h3>

<p>Systems of information shadows are created by promoting standard methods for associating a physical object and information about it. Experience designer Tom Coates coined the term point-at things  while compiling ways to organize BBC's program directory. [Footnote: See (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2000) for the information architecture standard the BBC produced as part of the process described in this section.] In that project, he realized that "once you [uniquely identify] a programme episode then something really significant happens—you can give it a name, make it addressable, you can—for the first time point at it. Better still, you can move from pointing at something to glueing handles onto it. And once you have such a handle, then you can pick up the programme and throw it around and stick labels on it and join it together with other programmes." (Coates, 2004) [The <a href=" http://www.plasticbag.org/archives/2005/04/the_age_of_pointatthings/">original post</a>.]</p>

<p>[Footnote: A similar term to point-at things is Bruce Sterling's spime, a neologism that merges space and time, because those are two key data points in an object's identity. As Sterling puts it, "every object worthy of human or machine consideration generates a small history. These histories are not dusty archives locked away on ink and paper. They are informational resources, manipulable in real time. […] The key to the spime is identity. A Spime must therefore be a thing with a name. No name, no spime." (Sterling, 2005)]</p>

<p><br />
His realization, which translates directly to organizing information shadows, is that when a unique identifier is attached to an object, it becomes possible to collect the metadata about that object into a single information shadow. That unique identifier is the leverage point with which to access and manipulate the whole information shadow in relation to similar shadows.</p>

<p>For example, when the online retailer Amazon branched out from selling books to selling other kinds of products, they needed a way to identify every item they sold. Extending the International Standard Book Number (ISBN) they were already using, they created the Amazon Standard Identification Number (ASIN) to uniquely identify every product they sell. This allowed all of the items they sell to become, in Coates' term, point-at things. It became possible to precisely identify exactly which product was being linked, discussed, etc.  That precision allowed for a wide degree of flexibility and power—which other services could use to build upon Amazon’s inventory systems. As of late 2009, ProgrammableWeb.com lists more than 300 services that use Amazon's ASIN system to create additional services. [Footnote: Using Amazon's eCommerce API.] Pickii, for example, uses ASINs, Amazon's list of categories, and user ratings for individual products to create a top-10 best-reviewed list for virtually every Amazon product category.</p>

<p>Matt Biddulph, one of Coates' colleagues at the BBC, and Ulla-Maaria Engeström (née Mutanen) took this idea further. While useful, Amazon's ASIN was limited to products Amazon sold. What about the "many small producers especially in developing countries do not have access to create unique identifiers, and therefore, their products are not equally visible or recommendable online" (Biddulph and Mutanen, 2006)?</p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_thinglink_small.jpg" /><br />
Figure 6-6. Unique item on Thinglink, showing Thinglink ID in the lower right-hand corner of the photo</p>

<p>In response to this observation Mutanen created Thinglink, "a service where anybody can register unique identifiers for objects that they want to identify as unique." The service generated a unique alphanumeric identifier (Figure 6-6), and served as the metadata clearinghouse to "aggregate online discussion around particular objects, track the history and transformation of objects, [and] socialize around particular objects." (Biddulph and Mutanen, 2006) In other words, Thinglinks were designed to create point-at-things out of any object by using user-generated unique identifiers to connect single items to their information shadows. [Footnote: As of the end of 2009, the service is still running at thinglink.com, but has shifted its focus from products created by small producers to high design objects.]</p>

<p>When data network access seems almost everywhere, the movement of information about objects within groups of people then intersects with their physical movements. Friends' recommendations, for example, can affect buying choices and preferences, while purchasing an object creates a data event that feeds up through the store's inventory, to the distributor's, all the way back to the manufacturer. Along the way, humans and automated systems make decisions that affect what happens to the object, whether the object is bought, sold, gifted, destroyed, or perhaps refurbished, extending the object’s social life.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_Nokia_3220_NFCShell_small.jpg" /><br />
Figure 6-7. Nokia 3220 with the NFC shell, the first mass markt mobile phone with a built-in RFID reader (Courtesy Nokia)</p>

<p>As optical identifiers, such as 2D barcodes, become more popular and devices such as the RFID reader on the Nokia 3220 (Figure 6-7) become inexpensive, this symmetry means that nearly everything can be uniquely identified on the cheap. [Footnote: At the time of writing, late 2009, there are more than 60 barcode and 2D barcode scanners in Apple's iPhone App Store.] Coates initially used point-at things to refer to digital objects, but it may soon be common to literally "point at things" to access their information shadows.</p>

<p><b>Tomorrow: Chapter 3, Part 4: The Internet of Things</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 6, Information Shadows, Part 2: Information Shadows</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_9.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.391</id>

    <published>2010-06-04T19:09:53Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:18Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 2 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. (Part 1) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Earlier chapters in this series: Chapter 3, Chapter 1 Citations to references can be found here. Chapter 6: Information shadows Part 2: Information shadows Then Wendy saw the shadow on the floor, looking so draggled, and she was frightfully sorry for Peter. &quot;How awful!&quot; she said, but she could not help smiling when she saw that he had been trying to stick it on with soap. How exactly like a boy! Fortunately she knew at once what to do. &quot;It must be sewn on,&quot; she said, just a little patronizingly. - Peter and Wendy by J. M. Barrie (1911) Figure 6-2. Amazon listing for Tickle Me Elmo, showing manufacturer metadata An Amazon product listing (Figure 6-2) shows a lot of information, but there&apos;s much more information about the product than just the official specs. An enormous quantity of user-generated content exists on the Internet tied to nearly every product. Virtually everything made or...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="userexperience" label="user experience" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 2 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. (<a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_8.html">Part 1</a>) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
Earlier chapters in this series: <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_4.html">Chapter 3</a>, <a href=" http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/04/smart_things_ch.html">Chapter 1</a>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>
<h2>Chapter 6: Information shadows</h2>
<h3>Part 2: Information shadows</h3>
<blockquote>
Then Wendy saw the shadow on the floor, looking so draggled, and she was frightfully sorry for Peter. "How awful!" she said, but she could not help smiling when she saw that he had been trying to stick it on with soap. How exactly like a boy!
Fortunately she knew at once what to do. "It must be sewn on," she said, just a little patronizingly.

<p>- Peter and Wendy by J. M. Barrie (1911)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_amazon_elmo_small.jpg" /></p>

<p>Figure 6-2. Amazon listing for Tickle Me Elmo, showing manufacturer metadata</p>

<p>An Amazon product listing (Figure 6-2) shows a lot of information, but there's much more information about the product than just the official specs. An enormous quantity of user-generated content exists on the Internet tied to nearly every product. Virtually everything made or grown has been reviewed, discussed, photographed, mocked, praised, prodded, measured, disassembled, and hacked. Until the Internet, little of this social life was available; now there's a flood.</p>

<p>The digitally accessible information about an object can be called its information shadow. [Footnote: The use of "shadow" to describe a relationship between physical objects and digital information goes back to Westin's 1967 description of "data shadows." My use is closest to Greenfield's 2006 use of it: "the significance of technologies like RFID and 2D barcoding is that they offer a low-impact way to 'import' physical objects into the datasphere, to endow them with an informational shadow."] Nearly all industrially created objects have rich information shadows, even if those shadows are invisible to their owners and users. </p>

<p>Wine bottles, for example, have very rich information shadows. Along with the traditional bottle-level data (such as when it was bottled, what grapes were used, who bottled it, etc.) wines have a huge social life generated by thousands of websites, blogs, rating services, and books. Wine enthusiasts probably spend as much time discussing wine as they do drinking it, and they've created a lot of content with easily accessible identifiers, namely the vineyard and vintage. [Footnote: Bruce Sterling describes the kind of social relationship we can have with wine in "Shaping Things," his 2005 book-length essay on ubiquitous computing and design.]</p>

<p>Everyday objects have been separated for a long time from their information shadows, as Peter Pan was from his actual shadow. The complexity of finding, organizing and accessing this information divided the world of objects and the world of information shadows. Even if accessible through a computer, information shadows were unavailable when they could provide the most value: in choosing between different products to buy, or in figuring out how to use a new tool. For example, barcodes aren’t human readable. So for a long time, only those with barcode readers and access to specialized databases could use them. [Footnote: This of course is no longer the case, as barcode reading cameraphone applications have proliferated in recent years, but that's a relatively recent phenomenon relative to the three decade-long history of bar codes in common usage.]  Which basically only included retailers and their employees. Even then the kinds of data available to retailers were limited. Standard Universal Product Code (UPC) barcodes identify classes of products, not individual things. Moreover, there is no universal database of barcodes. So a retailer's information about a given object is limited to data it has bought or generated on its own. Typically, like the early Borders Books system, retailers only keep enough information around to price items and order more.</p>

<p>A few industries have systematically generated and employed more extensive information shadows. In particular, the manufacturing and shipping industries have been tracking and identifying individual objects for years. In those industries every mile traveled by every piece of inventory directly affects revenue. So manufacturing and shipping   systems provide fine-grained information shadows to identify and locate objects. For example, Wal-Mart and the American military—two organizations that ship a huge variety of things to a dizzying number of locations—have enthusiastically adopted identification technology (Myerson, 2006) to increase efficiency.</p>

<p>For consumers, ubiquitous computing attaches the information shadow to the object, like Wendy does to Peter Pan's shadow. It does this using three key technologies:<ol><li>Inexpensive machine-readable item-level identification technologies (see Sidebar) uniquely mark every object.</li><li>Wireless networking makes the information shadow of objects accessible to devices in more places. </li><li>Networked information aggregation services create a standard way of accessing information shadows that are produced simultaneously in many places at once.</li></ol>Combining these technologies makes the information shadow of an object no longer something that's abstract and secondary—something to check when you're hoping for a FedEx package to arrive—but a key part of the user experience of interacting with nearly every manufactured good.</p>

<h2>Sidebar: Item-level Identification Technologies</h2>
There are many technologies for identifying individual items. The most basic identification consists of a unique number or code that is somehow associated with metadata about an object. That's how serial numbers on computers and cars work. More interesting effects appear when devices can read identifying codes without human intervention. Here is a sample of such machine-readable identification technologies.
<ul><li>Barcodes. These are most commonly seen representing the Universal Product Code that's on most retail packaging. They are used to uniquely identify items in corporate inventory systems and in certain niche markets, such as wine storage.</li><li><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_QR_code.jpg" />

<p>Figure 6-3. QR Code that reads "Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design" when decoded<br />
2D Barcodes. These come in many styles, from the Datamatrix code found on postal service package labels, to exotic fiducial markers used in motion sensing applications. QR Code markers (Figure 6-3), designed for easy reading using mobile device cameras, are increasingly popular.</li><li>RFID. Radio Frequency IDs (Figure 6-4) come in many shapes and sizes—from subway access cards, to paper and metal stickers, to ceramic cylinders that sit in the stomachs of cows. Small radios inside them broadcast a unique identifying number. Because radio waves can transmit through solid materials, RFIDs can embedded inside other objects (shipping palettes, clothing tags and animals). Passive RFIDs, the most common kind, gather energy from radio broadcasts received from RFID readers and reflect that energy back to the readers in the form of a wireless stream of data communicating their unique identifier. They do not need their own source of power to function, but consequently work only within relatively short distances. Active RFIDs use their own power sources to transmit data farther, but are more expensive and often require batteries.<br />
<img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_winem_rfid_small.jpg" /></p>

<p>Figure 6-4. An RFID attached to a wine bottle (photo Copyright 2007 by Tod E. Kurt, used by permission)<br />
</li><li>Smart cards. SIM cards are small processors packaged inside plastic cards. They transmit a unique identifier when in direct contact with a reader. Because they contain an active processor (typically powered through contact with a reader), they are capable of much more complex interaction. Thus, they can encrypt information, require authentication before transmitting their identifier, poll sensors, etc. Smart "buttons" that resemble coin cell batteries are a similar technology. These buttons also communicate through contact with a reader that also acts as a power source. </li><li>Magnetic stripes are familiar from credit cards and hotel entry cards. They are an established technology, and are easily created or changed, but are neither as compact, convenient or secure as some of the others on this list. </li><li>IPv6. For devices that are actively communicating through a network, IPv6 is an extension to the familiar Internet Protocol standard designed to uniquely identify trillions of devices. It was formally defined in the mid-1990s, and while uncommon in current Internet devices, it will likely become an identification standard for smart devices communicating over a network.</li></ul><br />
It's important to remember that unique identification and machine-readability are different functions enabled by separate technical choices. The methods listed above frequently combine the two, but readability and identification do not depend on each other. A single identification code can be either machine-readable or machine-unreadable and remain unique. An IPv6 address written on a PostIt and stuck to the side of a machine is still unique, but not easily machine-readable. Similarly, it's possible for multiple RFIDs to transmit the same identification code, just as it's possible for two twenty-dollar bills to have the same serial number.</p>

<p><b>Tomorrow: Chapter 3, Part 3: Point-at Things</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 6, Information Shadows, Part 1: An early success in item-level identification</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/06/smart_things_ch_8.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.390</id>

    <published>2010-06-03T02:33:49Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:18Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 1 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Citations to references can be found here. Chapter 6: Information Shadows Part 1 Every master goldsmith shall have a mark by himself. - King Edward III, 1363, (Chaffers and Markham, 1905) King Edward III of England didn’t require London goldsmiths to identify their wares because he liked collecting the objects they made or in promoting individual artisans. No, his motives were regulatory. He wanted to be able to track and punish smiths whose wares glittered, but weren’t quite gold. Figure 6-1. Silver hallmark indicates that Aaron Hadfield of Sheffield, England made this knife in 1834 (Courtesy Leopard Antiques, Cape Town) However, King Edward’s system of hallmarks (Figure 6-1) came to be much more valuable. As one of the earliest instances of catalogued metadata associated with manufactured goods, the system of hallmarks enabled a much different relationship between people and their possessions. Hallmarks re-associate objects with their origins. They systematically, consistently, connect two people (the owner...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="userexperience" label="user experience" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="writing" label="writing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 1 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 6 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>
<h2>Chapter 6: Information Shadows</h2>
<h3>Part 1</h3>
<blockquote>
Every master goldsmith shall have a mark by himself.<br \>
- King Edward III, 1363, (Chaffers and Markham, 1905)
</blockquote>
King Edward III of England didn’t require London goldsmiths to identify their wares because he liked collecting the objects they made or in promoting individual artisans. No, his motives were regulatory. He wanted to be able to track and punish smiths whose wares glittered, but weren’t quite gold.

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/6_silver_hallmark_small.jpg" \></p>

<p>Figure 6-1. Silver hallmark indicates that Aaron Hadfield of Sheffield, England made this knife in 1834 (Courtesy Leopard Antiques, Cape Town)</p>

<p>However, King Edward’s system of hallmarks (Figure 6-1) came to be much more valuable. As one of the earliest instances of catalogued metadata associated with manufactured goods, the system of hallmarks enabled a much different relationship between people and their possessions. Hallmarks re-associate objects with their origins. They systematically, consistently, connect two people (the owner and the maker) through an object. This silver knife (Figure 6-1) is not anonymous: if we can decode the hallmark, we know who made it, when, where, and of what material. In encoding information into objects, hallmarks link those objects to data.</p>

<p>That linkage has continued to prove valuable and important in unexpected ways. Identifying individual objects in the world builds a bridge between any given object and the available information about that object. It allows for physical, everyday objects to act in the world of symbolic data, and vice versa.</p>

<p>Before ubiquitous computing, only expensive things such as precious metals, currency, or large machines were individually identified with any regularity. [Footnote: Such as vehicle identification numbers, building addresses and serial numbers. Brock (2001) has a good list of earlier identification schemes, their format, and the motivation for their creation.] Only the cost of the item—or the social cost if the item went untracked (as with firearms)—justified the labor and monetary expense of labeling individual items and maintaining the metadata. Ubicomp includes a number of item-level tracking and identification technologies (see Sidebar) that dramatically lower the cost of adding machine-identifiable codes to objects and employing devices to read those codes automatically. Other information aggregation services can then build on these technologies to cross the gap between what a thing is, and the meanings people give it.</p>

<h2>An early success in item-level identification</h2>
Creating good user experiences by using item-level identification is not new. The early history of the Borders Books chain of bookstores is a good example of how a small amount of automated identification and information processing can profoundly change customer experiences and how a business operates.

<p>Borders Books started as a university town bookstore in Ann Arbor, Michigan. It was not significantly different from other bookstores in the town, except for a small innovation. Louis Borders, who founded the company with his brother Tom in the 1970s, had studied computer science. Thanks to this exposure to the power and mechanics of information processing, he realized that putting a unique computer punch card in every book in his bookstore would automatically identify the book when a computer read the card (Raff, 2000). The punch card system allowed Borders Books to take a near-instantaneous inventory of their store to identify which books had sold and when. Other bookstores conducted laborious annual inventories, at best. But Louis and Tom Borders could accomplish the same thing quickly and nearly at any time they wanted.</p>

<p>Here is how it worked: <ul><li>Every book had a punch card inserted into it, like a bookmark.</li><li>Cashiers removed the punch cards and set them aside while ringing up a purchase. </li><li>Periodically, all the collected punch cards went to a computing center, which generated a report on the sold books</li><li>Using the report, company managers could track books sold at which stores and when they sold. </li><li>This allowed store managers and book buyers to identify buying patterns and anticipate shortages.</li></ul><br />
[Footnote: This description is based on written descriptions of Borders systems (such as by Raff, 2000) and on my experience as a customer in the 1980s. One of their first stores outside Ann Arbor opened near where I grew up in the early 1980s and I regularly shopped at the Ann Arbor store as a University of Michigan student in the late-1980s.]</p>

<p>This seemingly small change gave Borders a significant advantage over its competitors, because they could keep a much wider variety of books, keep the popular ones perpetually in stock, and cater to local buying tastes and trends. They didn't have to shut down and count all their books like other stores, and they didn't have to rely on their hunches to figure out which books sold well in which stores. They soon outgrew their original Ann Arbor store and founded a software company—Book Inventory Systems—that sold their system to other bookstores. Today, they're a huge international chain. [Footnote: Which, it should be noted, is ironically struggling to compete with online book retailers whose advantages are created with many of the same technologies Borders pioneered.]</p>

<p>Item-level identification gave Borders a competitive advantage because it linked the physical object—a book—to important information about it. Some of that important information was permanent, such as the name of the book and its author. Other important information was contextually generated when the book sold—such as the store location and date of purchase. Equally important is that Borders Books was able to integrate the information tracking smoothly into the shopping experience. Most Borders customers may have never known how the punch card in every book, casually removed and put away by the cashier, was the lynchpin of their bookstore's success.</p>

<p><b>Tomorrow: Chapter 3, Part 2: Information Shadows</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>The postal service as geographic DNS</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/the_postal_serv.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.389</id>

    <published>2010-06-01T01:42:22Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:18Z</updated>

    <summary>I was recently at a bar with a bunch of other technology designers. The conversation turned to the postal service. Problem: the US Postal Service is in financial troubleAmerica&apos;s postal service was partially privatized in the 1980s, so it needs to make about as much money as it costs to operate if it&apos;s to survive. It&apos;s having a difficult time doing that and has lost billions of dollars per year for the last several years, borrowing from the federal government to stay afloat. As the second-largest civilian employer in the US after Wal-Mart (that&apos;s a sobering statistic in itself, on several levels), this means that it has quite a bit of overhead, while being at the receiving end of two technologically-induced competitive challenges: Casual letters have largely been replaced by emailAnd package delivery has to compete with FedEx, UPS, DHLMoreover, these other delivery services don&apos;t necessarily have to honor the post office&apos;s mandated responsibility to deliver mail to anywhere in the US (this is called the &quot;universal service obligation&quot;). Proposal: the Postal Service should become the geographic DNS….Here&apos;s what I came up with in the bar: the US Postal Service (USPS) needs to become the equivalent of the Domain Name...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Social effects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="geolocation" label="geolocation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="servicedesign" label="service design" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>I was recently at a bar with a bunch of other technology designers. The conversation turned to the postal service.<br />
<h2>Problem: the US Postal Service is in financial trouble</h2>America's postal service was <a href=" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usps#Governance_and_organization ">partially privatized</a> in the 1980s, so it needs to make about as much money as it costs to operate if it's to survive. It's having a difficult time doing that and has lost billions of dollars per year for the last several years, borrowing from the federal government to stay afloat. As the second-largest civilian employer in the US after Wal-Mart (that's a sobering statistic in itself, on several levels), this means that it has quite a bit of overhead, while being at the receiving end of two technologically-induced competitive challenges:<br />
<ul><li>Casual letters have largely been replaced by email</li><li>And package delivery has to compete with FedEx, UPS, DHL</li></ul>Moreover, these other delivery services don't necessarily have to honor the post office's mandated responsibility to deliver mail to anywhere in the US (this is called the "universal service obligation").<br />
<h2>Proposal: the Postal Service should become the geographic DNS….</h2>Here's what I came up with in the bar: the US Postal Service (USPS) needs to become the equivalent of the Domain Name Service for geographic locations. DNS is the digital service that translates human-readable domain names such as orangecone.com into IP addresses, such as 168.75.111.15.</p>

<p>This, more or less, is exactly what the USPS already does, but it's still tied to the sender writing the actual physical address on the letter. However, as any recipient of a slightly mis-addressed letter that still arrived knows, the service is actually pretty good at figuring out where the letter is going. The USPS is already resolving ambiguous address data into physical locations.<br />
It's been doing it for years:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envelope"> <img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/Envelope_-_Boonville_Address-small.jpg" /></a><br />
(Image Public Domain from Wikimedia)<br />
Why not make name-to-location resolution the primary role of the postal service?<br />
For example, rather than having your address be "Your Name, 1234 Oak Street, Town, State, Zip Code" you could pay to have it be "Your Name, Town, USA." Microsoft could pay to have their address just be "Microsoft, USA." It works for "Santa Claus," why can't the USPS charge MS to make it work for them?</p>

<p>On the back end, the postal service could provide a number of routing services using the infrastructure they already have. The "Microsoft" letter could go either to a regional office or to a central location, depending on what Microsoft wanted to pay for.<br />
<h2>…and charge for it.</h2>This would create a market like the market for domain names, which is very lucrative and active, but—unlike the domain name space—the post office would own all of it. They could just set up a name registry like what GoDaddy does, let people register names and then regulate the secondary market, much as how ICANN manages domain names. For the same reason that I can't register mcdonalds.com, I wouldn't be able to register "McDonald's, USA," and if I did, then there would be an arbitration process.</p>

<p>Let's look at the numbers.</p>

<p>According to the <a href="http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/smallbus.html">2002 US Census</a>, there are approximately 6 million small businesses in the US that have employees (there are 18 million other firms with no employees). For the purposes of extreme simplification, assuming that the smallest businesses aren't interested at all (which is probably not all true). That leaves almost 2.5 million businesses with 5 or more employees.</p>

<p>Given this single figure, here are three scenarios:<br />
<ul><li>Worst case: 1% of firms are interested in paying $100 a year to have this service. That equates to annual revenue of $2,500,000. Not bad, and could probably pay for itself, perhaps charging more than $100 for services for the largest firms (such as routing Microsoft's mail appropriately).</li><li>Median case: let's assume that 30% of the firms buy in. That's $75MM per year.</li><li>If 60% take it up, then that's $150MM per year.</li></ul>That's just the businesses. If 1% of the 300 million US residents are interested in paying $10 per year, that's an immediate annual income of $30MM for the USPS. 30% adoption would generate another $900MM per year.</p>

<p>My point is that they could just copy the way that DNS works from a service design perspective to create a highly lucrative line of business that sits on top of, and uses the infrastructure of, the business they already have. A business with an enormous increasing ongoing revenue stream.<br />
<h2>And then become the primary provider of geographic Point of Interest resolution</h2>Moreover, once the system was established, it wouldn't have to be limited to just moving physical products around. It could become the universal digital way to resolve points of interest to physical locations. Many companies are busy building businesses around creating point of interest (POI) database. The postal service essentially "owns" all of the physical location data, and a lot of the POI data is probably already in their system, just not in a way that's been exposed to the world.</p>

<p>They also have an extensive network of people and machines (the largest civilian vehicle fleet in the world, according to Wikipedia) that could continually add to the database.</p>

<p>Then they could charge for bulk data rental for other services to build on this.<br />
As the importance of location based information grows, the value of a USPS API will only grow, while the value of their primary business (moving stuff around) shrinks.</p>

<p>The USPS is a special organization that has a unique structure (part independent corporation, part government agency) which gives them a significant competitive advantage. They also have enormous resources for converting physical location information into data, and vice versa. They are also <a href=" http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/FY_2009_10K_Report_Final.pdf">losing 4 billion dollars a year</a> (1MB PDF). Moving atoms will only become more expensive as energy becomes more expensive. The USPS needs to start moving bits.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 3, Interaction Metaphors, Part 4: Too Much Metaphor</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_7.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.388</id>

    <published>2010-05-10T00:12:23Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:18Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 4 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 3 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. (Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 2) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Last month I posted a draft of Chapter 1. Citations to references can be found here. Part 4: Sidebar: Too Much Metaphor, Magic Cap General Magic&apos;s Magic Cap was an early operating system for mobile devices. It can be thought of as an early attempt at a user-centered ubiquitous computing experience design. It is also an example of a product that followed its metaphor too far. Sony Magic Link (Courtesy Sony) Designed for portable, networked computing, the launch of Magic Cap in 1994 predated the Palm OS by several years. Magic Cap provided similar functionality to the Palm OS, but with one crucial difference: from the start General Magic had designed Magic Cap for networked communications. Both devices that ran Magic Cap, the Sony Magic Link and the Motorola Envoy, were tablet PCs with built-in networking (the Sony had a phone modem and the Motorola had an...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="userexperience" label="user experience" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="writing" label="writing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 4 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 3 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_4.html">Part 1</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_5.html">Part 2</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_6.html">Part 3</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_5.html">Part 2</a>) The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
<p>Last month I posted a draft of <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/04/smart_things_ch.html">Chapter 1</a>.</p>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>

<h3>Part 4: Sidebar: Too Much Metaphor, Magic Cap </h3>

<p>General Magic's Magic Cap was an early operating system for mobile devices. It can be thought of as an early attempt at a user-centered ubiquitous computing experience design. It is also an example of a product that followed its metaphor too far.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/sony_magic_link_small.jpg" /><br />
Sony Magic Link (Courtesy Sony)</p>

<p>Designed for portable, networked computing, the launch of Magic Cap in 1994 predated the Palm OS by several years. Magic Cap provided similar functionality to the Palm OS, but with one crucial difference: from the start General Magic had designed Magic Cap for networked communications. Both devices that ran Magic Cap, the Sony Magic Link and the Motorola Envoy, were tablet PCs with built-in networking (the Sony had a phone modem and the Motorola had an early wireless modem).</p>

<p>On the back end, Magic Cap's architecture used software "agents" written in a language called Telescript, which could run outside of the device to perform actions on the Internet and deliver results back to the user. [Footnote: Magic Cap mixed its metaphors, too, describing their software having simultaneously as "agents" (Tardo et al., 1996) and a "cloud" (Hendler, 2000) while using neither of those two concepts in the interface in that way (there is a cloud in the Downtown sky, but it is unrelated to the Internet, which is an office building).]</p>

<p>Key members of the Macintosh development team led General Magic. They decided to leverage their work on the Macintosh interface and extend the desktop metaphor to a networked device environment. </p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/3_magic_cap_1.gif" /><br />
Figure 3-6: Magic Cap home screen.</p>

<p>  The Magic Cap home screen (Figure 3-6) centers on an image of an office desk. It is a surprisingly literal interpretation of the desktop metaphor after a decade of mass popularity. Perhaps they zoomed out from the two-dimensional “desktop” view to emphasize how a portable, mobile device would move off the desktop and into the three-dimensionality of a real room. </p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/3_magic_cap_2.gif" /><br />
Figure 3-7: Magic Cap hallway.</p>

<p>However, the realistic, spatial implementation of an "office" metaphor constrained them further. Thus, users had to walk down the "hallway" (Figure 3-7) to access functionality located in different rooms.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.orangecone.com/images/3_magic_cap_3.gif" /><br />
Figure 3-8: Magic Cap Downtown.</p>

<p>The literal interpretation of the office building metaphor even produced a city street. The town center (Figure 3-8) had an Internet office building and a diner with a Web browser accessible through a movie poster. The interaction resembled a sideways scrolling adventure game more than an operating system for business users (Sony's target audience for the device).</p>

<p>It is difficult to say whether the decision to structure the user experience as an adventure through a software suite primarily caused Magic Cap’s business failure. It is clear, however, that the metaphor, and General Magic's literal interpretation of it, significantly constrained the design. Even in the early days of mobile device usage, the literalism may have hurt comprehension as much as it helped. Many screens required significant "signage" to explain what various iconic images meant. Other icons, such as the "magic lamp" icon located at the bottom of every screen, simply did not make sense within the town center metaphor.</p>

<p>Extending the desktop metaphor to buildings may have seemed like a good idea initially, but it became increasingly baroque in its details. Ultimately it turned using the operating system into a long walk through an unknown city full of confusing signs, which is possibly the least magical experience of all.</p>

<p><b>Next Month: Chapter 6, Information Shadows</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smart Things: Chapter 3, Interaction Metaphors, Part 3: Designing with Metaphors</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_6.html" />
    <id>tag:orangecone.com,2010:/stage//2.387</id>

    <published>2010-05-06T16:13:44Z</published>
    <updated>2010-06-24T03:14:18Z</updated>

    <summary>This is Part 3 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 3 from Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design, my upcoming book. (Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 4)The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it&apos;s a taste of what the book is about. Last month I posted a draft of Chapter 1 Citations to references can be found here. Part 3: Designing with Metaphors Metaphors are complicated tools. They inspire us to make new associations and can communicate complex ideas quickly, but they also constrain thought. Connections that may make sense in the metaphor&apos;s source concept may not exist in the target. For example, Netscape&apos;s Navigator browser provided little guidance on how to reach a destination, like an actual navigator would. If its exploration metaphor is interpreted literally, browsers are more like boats, and search engines (which, coincidentally, little resemble engines from a user&apos;s perspective) are the navigators. As documented by Blackwell (2006), the history of metaphors in interaction design has gone through boom times -- the 1980s success of the desktop metaphor -- to times of extreme criticism and failure (the infamous Microsoft Office 97 paperclip). [Footnote: Blackwell (2006) is indispensable for...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mike Kuniavsky</name>
        <uri>http://www.orangecone.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Smart Objects" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="smartthings" label="Smart Things" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubicomp" label="ubicomp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ubiquitouscomputing" label="ubiquitous computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="userexperience" label="user experience" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="writing" label="writing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://orangecone.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><b>This is Part 3 of a pre-print draft of Chapter 3 from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0123748992/orangecone-20"> Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing User Experience Design</a>, my upcoming book. (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_4.html">Part 1</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_5.html">Part 2</a>) (<a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/05/smart_things_ch_7.html">Part 4</a>)The final book will be different and this is no substitute for it, but it's a taste of what the book is about.</b></p>
<p>Last month I posted a draft of <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/04/smart_things_ch.html">Chapter 1</a></p>
<p>Citations to references can be found <a href="http://www.orangecone.com/archives/2010/03/smart_things_re.html" target="_blank">here.</a></p>

<h3>Part 3: Designing with Metaphors </h3>

<p>Metaphors are complicated tools. They inspire us to make new associations and can communicate complex ideas quickly, but they also constrain thought. Connections that may make sense in the metaphor's source concept may not exist in the target. For example, Netscape's Navigator browser provided little guidance on how to reach a destination, like an actual navigator would. If its exploration metaphor is interpreted literally, browsers are more like boats, and search engines (which, coincidentally, little resemble engines from a user's perspective) are the navigators. As documented by Blackwell (2006), the history of metaphors in interaction design has gone through boom times -- the 1980s success of the desktop metaphor -- to times of extreme criticism and failure (the infamous Microsoft Office 97 paperclip). [Footnote: Blackwell (2006) is indispensable for those interested in the history and cultural role of metaphor in human computer interaction.] Despite the criticism, however, metaphors remain powerful and valuable tools. They are one of the most straightforward ways to tap into existing knowledge to create a familiar narrative out of novel functionality.</p>

<p>This chapter provides a set of benchmarks for thinking metaphorically about ubicomp UX design. If the assumptions behind a project recall one of these metaphors, it is possible to ask the following questions about the design metaphor as a way to understand the project's limits and possibilities -- and your own as a designer.<br />
<ul><br />
<li>What is the comparison that this metaphor is making? What class does it say that the design and the metaphor belong to? </li><br />
<li>What is the list of tools and activities associated with the source concept? How would those map to the experience being designed? </li><br />
<li>What are the visual images the source concept evokes? What are the interaction patterns that it implies? Are there necessarily positive outcomes to those patterns? Negative ones? </li><br />
<li>What is the purpose of using the metaphor? What exactly do you need it to accomplish? What associations is it supposed to evoke and what actions will the metaphorical associations make easier? </li><br />
<li>What are the boundaries of the metaphor? At what point do the differences between domains become so great that the metaphor hurts more than it helps? </li><br />
</ul></p>

<dl>
<dd><h3>Sidebar: Dan Saffer's Guidelines</h3>
The following guidelines from ubicomp designer <a href="http://www.odannyboy.com/">Dan Saffer</a> (2005) provide a sequence for approaching the design of interaction metaphors and designing with metaphors. It begins with a focus on the culture of use and ends with advice for identifying and discarding metaphors that are no longer valuable.
<ol>
<li>Metaphors are cultural. Different cultures have different conceptual frameworks, especially about abstract ideas like time. Be conscious of differences when picking metaphors that span multiple cultures. Not only are metaphors culturally specific, but they can also be limited to specific audiences within that culture. If you do not have a desktop, the desktop metaphor could be meaningless to you. </li>
<li>Metaphors are contextual. Be aware of the context in which the metaphor is used. What can work in one medium or domain may not work elsewhere. Unless you are deliberately juxtaposing for effect, metaphors within a product should fit the context in which they will be used. The subject matter of most projects will likely be rich with its own metaphors. Finding and utilizing them can make powerful connections between the product and its context of use. </li>
<li>Fit the metaphor to the functionality, not the other way around. Metaphor should be a tool to help users comprehend unfamiliar content or functionality. So when using a metaphor within a product, start with the new, unfamiliar (to users) material you have and make that the subject of the metaphor, not the referrer. Awkward situations are more likely to happen when functionality is shoehorned into a metaphor. In the best case, metaphors should support concepts, not be supported by concepts or be the concept. </li>
<li>Use metaphor to uncover otherwise hidden aspects of the material. While "banking is a game" might be an inappropriate metaphor when used inside a product, it could be a powerful metaphor to use during concept development to show what banking is not. And even perhaps what it is. </li>
<li>Discard process metaphors when necessary. Metaphors that have been used in brainstorming or during the design process can grow constrained or simply be inappropriate for users. In some cases, it is better to have no metaphor at all than an inappropriate one. </li>
<li>Do not let your metaphor ruin key features. Designers need to realize that all metaphors can obscure as much as they illuminate, and they should choose their metaphors so they do not obscure or distort key features. Microsoft╒s recycling bin in Windows OS is cute, but is less clear than a trash can or a dumpster would be. </li>
<li>Choose metaphors that are appropriately scalable. The desktop metaphor has lasted as long as it has because it scales very well. Many varied tasks fit well into its framework; likewise, the folder metaphor. Other metaphoric choices (an envelope instead of a folder, say) may not have scaled so well. (On the other hand, using the metaphor of a workbench instead of a desktop might have supported many activities, not just working with paper.) </li>
<li>Let your metaphors degrade and die. Once an appropriate metaphor is understood, it becomes nearly unconscious ("dead"), only to become apparent again with effort. Although this has been criticized, this is a good thing, as intermediate and advanced users should not have to bother with the metaphor and deal more directly with the underlying material. It is only inappropriate metaphors that continue to hinder more experienced users. This is, in fact, a good test for whether or not a metaphor is appropriate. Metaphors can be a double-edged sword. </li>
</ol>
</dd>
</dl>

<p>The rest of this chapter are my own guidelines for metaphor design.</p>

<ol>
<li><h3><em>Create Specific Metaphors</em></h3>
To give the widest possible overview, the previous list organizes metaphors into very broad categories. In practice, metaphors for each specific project are much narrower. In deciding to make an enchanted object, for example, designers pick a specific magic item to emulate (say, a magic mirror). Then, the rest of the design process can move from the first principle that "in video conferencing the computer screen is a kind of magic mirror."

<p>Design decisions flow from this more narrow metaphor, but the broader metaphor provides guidance for how that specific experience fits into a larger set of ideas. If computers are invisible, for example, how do people know where they are? Are they just invisible to people, or also to each other? How does someone tell this specific information processing-enabled invisible experience apart from all the others? How do they know where one invisible computer ends and the others begin?</li></p>

<p><li><h3><em>Good metaphors describe function, not appearance</em></h3><br />
Metaphors should describe deep functional similarities, not superficial resemblance. A well-chosen metaphor maps many of the experiential qualities of one kind of interaction to another. Magic wands in myth, for example, are swung around and pointed at objects to activate actions. The Nintendo Wii captures these qualities well, creating a relatively clear relationship between familiar stories and a new game controller. A game controller that looked like a traditional magic wand (glittery star on top, etc.) but operated like an ink pen would be simply confusing.</li></p>

<p><li><h3><em>Metaphors Imply People</em></h3><br />
<blockquote>When we propose that a computer be presented as a metaphorical office or typewriter, one of the things we are really describing is the intended user of this computer, describing him or her as an office worker or typist.</blockquote><br />
- Blackwell (2006)</p>

<p>Metaphors establish not only ideas about the meaning of physical affordances and potential ways to use them, but also about the people involved. A metaphor communicates a set of roles for people involved in the device's use. For example, a digital device resembling a stethoscope implies that the user is similar to a medical clinician and that its intended use is diagnostic. If the device is not medical (i.e., rapid transit personnel use it to verify passengers' RFID passes), the mismatch can produce awkward misunderstandings. The transit workers may feel misrepresented by the device, and the passengers may worry about what exactly it is scanning. </p>

<p>Schank and Abelson (1977) theorized that people reason about the world using expected sequences of actions akin to film scripts. Metaphors embody those scripts by affecting the design of an object╒s form and functionality. By linking the new to the familiar, metaphors communicate how people and devices should act together. Devices are props to carry out those scripts. (Yet another metaphor!) The more explicitly devices rely on metaphor, the more explicitly they reference known characters and how they behave. If the script referenced by the prop does not fit the needs of the people actually using it, or is unfamiliar to them, the prop will be less successful. Thus, the choice of the metaphor should start with the expectations, needs, desires, and actions of the people involved.</li></p>

<p><li><h3><em>Use metaphors to inspire, not constrain</em></h3><br />
<blockquote>Almost any metaphor, even an arbitrary one, can trigger new ways of thinking about a product or new solutions to a design problem.</blockquote><br />
- Saffer (2005)</p>

<p>In the 1920s, surrealist artists invented a game of map misdirection. Using a map of one city, they would try to navigate another city. They would pick a destination, and simply follow the map. For example, a trip in Berlin using a map of Paris would end at a barber shop in the suburbs instead of the Eiffel Tower. In the process, apart from having some absurdist fun, they would learn more about both Berlin and Paris.</p>

<p>Similarly, generating new ideas is one of the most powerful results of using metaphor to design user experiences. When mapping one idea to another, the differences between the two domains highlight aspects of both that might not otherwise be noticed. A "butler" device that can understand some spoken comments, for example, probably reaches the limits of its actual understanding very quickly. The designer may well imagine what an actual butler would do in a similar situation. The metaphor raises the question: How do people communicate when they do not understand a phrase, even if they understand each individual word? It also points to a new domain of functionality: more than speech recognition, the system might need to be presented more like a student with limited knowledge of a foreign language than a smoothly polite butler. Similarly, the system may need to imitate how people pause to think in a conversation as a way to explain pauses for processing.</li></p>

<p><li><h3><em>Use metaphors to explain, not hide</em></h3><br />
Metaphors can help explain the functionality of unfamiliar technologies and inspire reflection on how relationships between people and interactive systems unfold. They are, by definition, a distortion of the capabilities and functionality of the technology they are used to explain. If not approached carefully, that distortion can hide vital aspects of the technology from users. The right level of concealment is highly context-dependent, as Saffer's guidelines point out. On one end of the spectrum, toys designed to stimulate the imagination of children can fully embrace the magical metaphor. Misalignments between what children believe is happening and the toys actual functioning are tolerable if they support open-ended, imaginative play. At the other end, airplane cockpit designers must confirm that any metaphorical relationship helps pilots respond correctly to changing conditions and is more cognitively efficient than a non-metaphorical design. Thus, interfaces that simulate hydraulic flaps but control a mechanism that is not actually hydraulic12 need careful evaluation to make sure that they really assist pilots. </li><br />
</ol></p>

<p>Ultimately, metaphors may be most useful during first encounters with a new technology. Declaring that a new technology resembles a familiar one, even if that apparent resemblance is only skin-deep, may lower anxiety and help people transfer existing skills to a new tool. In the transition to a new tool, a few conceptual misunderstandings, or inefficient use, may be a small price to pay for reducing a normal reluctance to try something new. However, as the technology becomes familiar, the metaphor may lose its value. Eventually, the metaphor that seemed so helpful may start creating more problems than it solves. Where this point lies is unique to every product and every group of new users. Recognizing that metaphors have failed can be humbling, but metaphors, like all tools, need regular maintenance.</p>

<p><b>Tomorrow: Chapter 3, Part 4: Too Much Metaphor, Magic Cap</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

</feed>
