In 2013, the Tory-led coalition government imposed fees for the employment tribunals where workers can enforce their rights. Would-be claimants have to pay an issue fee and a hearing fee. For a typical unfair dismissal claim these will be more than £1,000. There is no automatic entitlement to recover these fees even if the claimant is successful: the claimant has to ask for the tribunal to exercise a discretion.
The practical effect of these fees has been severe: few claimants, even with good cases, can now either afford the fees or take the risk of losing. Claims have dropped by about 80 per cent.
I used videos recorded from trains windows, with landscapes that moves from right to left and trained a Machine Learning (ML) algorithm with it. First, it learns how to predict the next frame of the videos, by analyzing examples. Then it produces a frame from a first picture, then another frame from the one just generated, etc. The output becomes the input of the next calculation step. So, excepting the first one that I chose, all the other frames were generated by the algorithm. The results are low resolution, blurry, and not realistic most of the time. But it resonates with the feeling I have when I travel in a train. It means that the algorithm learned the patterns needed to create this feeling. Unlike classical computer generated content, these patterns are not chosen or written by a software engineer. In this video, nobody made explicit that the foreground should move faster than the background: thanks to Machine Learning, the algorithm figured that itself. The algorithm can find patterns that a software engineer may haven’t noticed, and is able to reproduce them in a way that would be difficult or impossible to code.
It’s good to bluntly recognize that people aren’t homeless because the planet’s surface lacks structures to house people. They’re homeless for economic and cultural reasons that are “on another level” from tacking-together some IKEA shelter, and no amount of learned architectural solutionism is gonna actually house them.
It feels like it’s stating the obvious, but maybe it’s not that obvious.
Do you want to give your kids a screen loaded with movies they can use on road trips without worrying about a spill killing a $400 tablet? Amazon has you covered, get one for everyone in the family. The six-pack option is going to be a wonderful option for anyone working in education. The price is low, the size is right for little hands, and a cracked screen or spill is only a $42 replacement cost for parents for schools assuming the six packs are bought. Educational games don’t really need a ton of power, nor do reading programs.
Buy one and attach it to the wall in your kitchen for recipes, and keep it there. It’s only $50. Use it as an e-reader that you aren’t scared to use in the bath tub. Let your toddlers play with it. The sky is the limit here, and the use case is any situation where you need a moderately powered tablet but you’re too nervous about using a full-priced model.
I’m ordering a six pack, and I don’t have one particular use for them yet.
It’s perfectly alright, in fact healthy, for designers to have differing philosophies of what is and isn’t part of the design process.
I come from a fine arts background in which the tools and methods of producing the art were taught right alongside of the thought and theory that goes into the conception of the art. It is no surprise, then, that I enjoy the process of creation. Most artists will tell you that the result of their work is informed by the process of creating it.
The same applied to my training as a graphic designer. I learned to draw symbols by hand and paint them on board with plaka while at the same time learning to draw them in Aldus Freehand using bezier curves. These skills were coupled with the process of solving a client’s communication problems.
And so to software. As I learned the craft and theory of interaction design, I also taught myself tools with which to realize my designs. I became quite proficient in Lingo, the scripting language of Macromedia Director. As I transitioned to web design, I learned HTML and CSS. Eventually, I learned some jQuery, and now my team has become familiar with Angular.
I believe that the design process extends to the making—that the making informs the design. A design must remain malleable during production. It should be open to improvement and flexible when compromises are required. Even in software, implementation can lead to inspiration.
This is what I believe and have found to be true. Your mileage may vary.
The question was raised on the Product Tribes Slack team: “Anyone know of a good source that defines the difference between ‘search’ and ‘filter’?”
Louis Elfman said, “Search is pulling in info from off-screen or a different conceptual space, ‘filter’ is refining a group of elements either already displayed or at least already “presented”.
Dave Malouf responded, “I don’t have a source on the topic, but “strings” equal search, metadata selection/modification (like ranges) equals filter. ‘on/off screen’ is tricky in an infinite scrolling environment or even paging set.”
My answer is, no, there is not a good source that defines the difference. I did some searching, and all I turned up were some people asking variations of that question and giving their personal opinions. I thought I had written about this on DesignAday years ago, but searching my archive turned up zilch.
So, let’s take a crack at it, shall we?
A dictionary definition of “search” is “try to find something by looking or otherwise seeking carefully and thoroughly.” In contrast, the definition for “filter” is “pass (a liquid, gas, light, or sound) through a device to remove unwanted material.” So, when it comes to the origins of the words, filtering is really just a more specific technique of searching. But, I think we can do a little better than that.
In our domain, the “something” we’re trying to find is data, and the “device” we’re passing it through is an algorithm. The key, then, is the phrase “remove unwanted material”.
When you begin a search within software, you are typically starting from scratch. Certainly, there is some body of data out there, be it the contents of a document repository or the entirety of the World Wide Web, but it is unknown to you. All you have is an empty field. And so you type into that box a word or phrase and in a matter of seconds, you have a list of results. You started with nothing, and you ended up with something.
When you filter, there is already a known data set. You may not be able to see all of it at once, but you are able to see some of it, and you are able to access all of it via scrolling, paging, or some other navigation mechanism. Filtering removes data that you aren’t interested in so that you can more easily see the data you want.
What are the non-textual, un-recordable forms of cultural memory? These questions are especially relevant for marginalized populations, indigenous cultures, and developing nations. Performance studies scholar Diana Taylor urges us to acknowledge ephemeral, performative forms of knowledge, such as dance, ritual, cooking, sports, and speech. These forms cannot be reduced to “information,” nor can they be “processed,” stored, or transmitted via fiber-optic cable. Yet they are vital urban intelligences that live within bodies, minds, and communities.
A life spent buried in video games, scraping by on meagre pay from irregular work or dependent on others, might seem empty and sad. Whether it is emptier and sadder than one spent buried in finance, accumulating points during long hours at the office while neglecting other aspects of life, is a matter of perspective.
Good ends, as I have frequently to point out, can be achieved only by the employment of appropriate means. The end cannot justify the means, for the simple and obvious reason that the means employed determine the nature of the ends produced.
Welcome to the Moral Machine! A platform for gathering a human perspective on moral decisions made by machine intelligence, such as self-driving cars.
We show you moral dilemmas, where a driverless car must choose the lesser of two evils, such as killing two passengers or five pedestrians. As an outside observer, you judge which outcome you think is more acceptable. You can then see how your responses compare with those of other people.
Students who acquire large debts putting themselves through school are unlikely to think about changing society. When you trap people in a system of debt they can’t afford the time to think. Tuition fee increases are a ‘disciplinary technique’ and by the time students graduate, they are not only loaded with debt, they have also internalized the ‘disciplinarian culture.’
This makes them efficient components of the consumer economy.
Executives at Volkswagen had ordered their software engineers to figure out a way to trick the Environmental Protection Agency during their emissions tests. They knew that during these tests, regulators would use specific parameters. So they wrote logic that — if those parameters were selected — the engine would run in a special mode.
This “defeat device” masked the fact that “clean diesel” Volkwagen engines were actually producing much greater nitrogen-oxide (NOx) emissions than were legally allowed. Up to 40 times the federal limit.
And this stuff causes lung cancer. MIT scientists estimate that these emissions will ultimately cause 60 people to die prematurely. And that’s just in America.
That’s right — the software these developers wrote kills innocent people.
The more powerful and inevitable something appears, the more startling and devastating its weaknesses are when they are exposed. Or, to borrow a phrase, the harder they come, the harder they fall.
That’s useful to remember when you consider the transformation we are currently undergoing, one in which more and more of our devices become connected to the internet. Whether you call it the “Internet of Things” or the “Internet of Everything” or the “Third Wave” or the “Programmable World,” the long-predicted moment when connectivity becomes as ubiquitous as electricity is nearly upon us. The benefits will be staggering—a world that will know us and adjust to our needs and desires, a universe of data that will impart new wisdom. But so will the vulnerabilities, the opportunities for our worlds to be penetrated, manipulated, and even destroyed by malevolent intruders.
This exposes yet another vulnerability for the tech industry—a meta-vulnerability, really. That vision depends on trust. It requires us to put our faith in our self-driving cars and Alexa-enabled virtual assistants and thermostats and, yes, smart televisions. Every time we learn of a new zero-day exploit, it renews fears of an entirely hackable world, where our machines can be enlisted against us. It reminds us that the future is a necessarily more vulnerable place.
The Vault 7 leak is not the tech industry’s fault, exactly, but we must ask at what point we stop placing our trust in devices, systems, and people that are inherently undeserving of it? Actually, never mind, we’re past it already. The most troubling aspect of the latest revelations is that there is no way to protect yourself beyond not buying a smartphone, or at least not having any meaningful conversations when you are in the same room with one. These vulnerabilities and cracks are not optional, but woven throughout the fabric of our social and commercial lives. They are coming from inside the house.
I’ve asked if they considered to pay the driver more? He said that it’s not ideal, since they want to keep their service as affordable as possible. He then added that I must realize that they were not competing with Taxis for the drivers, but rather with Walmart. Implying that if the drivers could earn slightly above the minimum wage driving for Uber, things were OK.
“He said that it’s not ideal, since they want to keep their service as affordable as possiblemake as much money as possible.”
Well, just as we engage in a diplomatic dialogue with countries, we also need to establish and prioritize comprehensive relations with tech actors, such as Google, Facebook, Apple and so on. The idea is, we see a lot of companies and new technologies that will in many ways involve and be part of everyday life of citizens in Denmark. And some [of these companies] also have a size that is comparable to nations.
As both Sanders and the philosopher Slavoj Zizek noted after Sanders lost the primaries, left and right are in some sense outdated ideas. The new division in politics is those who favor the current global hegemony and those who are against it. Like the Hollywood heroes, right and left have been competing to become this new radical anti-status quo party.
*Okay, the one with the welding mask is a “Worker,” and the one on the farm with the red kerchief is obviously a “Peasant,” but what’s with the blue-eyed blonde in the skyscraper utopia who doesn’t have to lift a finger and also has the nicest hairstyle?
*I’m guessing that she’s got to be a Communist Party leader. She’s the politician. That’s why things are so “glorious” for “Soviet women.”
*Also: their somber and Slavic female expressions. None of those husband-pleasing Yankee grins and nods. “I’ll be over here doing the taxes and getting the car repaired while you’re drunk. When you overdo that, I’ll bury you.” They’re holding up way more than half their smokestack sky.
An “exaggerated, self-aggrandising individualism is very common, you can see that in the way that we live at the moment,” says Kapos. “If you go into the City [of London], you can see how traders think of themselves being expressed in the architecture. They really do think that they’re completely self-enclosed, heroic individuals, who have every right to behave in the way that they do, and it’s profoundly antisocial and destructive. A Muji City would be the opposite of the City of London. They’re both different kinds of representations of social life.”
In Don Delillo’s novel White Noise (1984) - which by the way is both hilarious and more relevant than ever with its themes of media saturation, environmental catastrophe, consumerism as religion, and fascism (the main character is a university chair of Hitler Studies) - there is a philosophical exchange on the subject of everything we don’t know about the technologically advanced society we live in. Framed as a kind of Socratic dialogue between father and son (with the son always playing Socrates), the 14-year-old Heinrich describes our diminished agency in a system that casts us only as passive consumers. ‘What good is knowledge’, he asks, ‘if it just floats in the air? It goes from computer to computer. It changes and grows every second of every day. But nobody actually knows anything.’
To illustrate this point he gives a lengthy diatribe on everything we don’t know about the society we live in. The ignorance he describes is highlighted by the community’s helplessness in the face of a catastrophe (an ‘Airborne Toxic Event’ set off by a chemical spill):
‘It’s like we’ve been flung back in time,’ he said. ‘Here we are in the Stone Age, knowing all these great things after centuries of progress but what can we do to make life easier for the Stone Agers? Can we make a refrigerator? Can we even explain how it works? What is electricity? What is light? We experience these things every day of our lives but what good does it do if we find ourselves hurled back in time and we can’t even tell people the basic principles much less actually make something that would improve conditions. Name one thing you could make. Could you make a simple wooden match that you could strike on a rock to make a flame? We think we’re so great and modern. Moon landings, artificial hearts. But what if you were hurled into a time warp and came face to face with the ancient Greeks. The Greeks invented trigonometry. They did autopsies and dissections. What could you tell an ancient Greek that he couldn’t say, “Big Deal.” Could you tell him about the atom? Atom is a Greek word. The Greeks knew that the major events in the universe can’t be seen by the eye of man. It’s waves, it’s rays, it’s particles.’
‘We’re doing all right.’
‘We’re sitting in this huge moldy room. It’s like we’re flung back.’
‘We have heat, we have light.’
‘These are Stone Age things. They had heat and light. They had fire. They rubbed flints together and made sparks. Could you rub flints together? Would you know a flint if you saw one? If a Stone Ager asked you what a nucleotide is, could you tell him? How do we make carbon paper? What is glass? If you came awake tomorrow in the Middle Ages and there was an epidemic raging, what could you do to stop it, knowing what you know about the progress of medicines and diseases? Here it is practically the twenty-first century and you’ve read hundreds of books and magazines and seen a hundred TV shows about science and medicine. Could you tell those people one little crucial thing that might save a million and a half lives?’
‘“Boil your water,” I’d tell them.’
‘Sure. What about “Wash behind your ears.” That’s about as good.’
‘I still think we’re doing fairly well. There was no warning. We have food, we have radios.’
‘What is a radio? What is the principle of a radio? Go ahead, explain. You’re sitting in the middle of this circle of people. They use pebble tools. They eat grubs. Explain a radio.’
It’s an unsettling speech. Sure, some of us know how a radio works, or how to light a fire without a match, but not many; certainly it’s a shrinking minority. Learning how things work is one small step we can take, especially now that all the information we need is literally at our fingertips.
We’ve been talking a lot recently about Albert Borgmann’s device paradigm, about ‘thingness’ and being connected to a larger ecosystem. Borgmann illustrates his concept with the image of the traditional hearth, ‘a place that gathered the work and leisure of a family and gave the house a centre’. Our latest projects explore in part the ways we might make devices back into things.
On a less pedantic note, we had a clear night this week and we got a fire going. We wanted to meet for a couple of hours, the two of us and our PhD student Enrique, to develop some fresh ideas for future projects. Why go to a meeting room when you can sit by the fire with a sketchbook and pencil and a bottle (or two) of good red wine? So that’s what we did. The fireside is now our preferred meeting place, especially for the big ideas that can be filled in with details later. It’s a good way to escape the noise and rediscover the signal.
Choi argues that our phones are objects unlike almost anything else we’ve ever had. He says that they’re more like prosthetic limbs than they are like wallets or even notebooks. “Our data is deeply imbued with our personhood, and leaving it unguarded leaves our persons unprotected by the Constitution,” he wrote in his paper on the intersection between the fourth and fifth amendments.
Choi argues that evidence the police pull from your phone isn’t like having a friend testify against you. And it’s not like having a bloody shirt or glove presented as evidence. It’s another thing entirely. It would be like someone was able to scan your brain and read your thoughts, and then use those thoughts against you. If we had machines that could actually read minds, and that could extract memories to play for the court, that would be more akin to our cell phones contents than anything else. And Choi thinks that should be protected, in the same way that the memories contained within our fleshy brains are protected.
And this brings us to some questions too about the future search of cell phones. Here’s an analogy: when the police get a warrant to search a house, they often have to specify which parts of the home they want to search, and justify why they want access to those rooms. And if they find evidence in parts of the home they weren’t supposed to be in, that evidence can’t be used in court. So if the police do get a warrant to search a cell phone, should that warrant be limited to certain apps or sections of the phone? Will future warrants be specifically for the photo albums, but exclude the contents of apps like Tinder or WhatsApp?
Or, to bring it back to the border situation, will border guards be given permission to look at your Twitter and Facebook profiles, but not, say, read your emails or text messages? Which rooms of your digital house are they allowed to go into without a warrant? Nobody knows, this is uncharted territory. But I suspect, with all the high profile searches happening right now, we might see a few of these cases in court soon.
Crap Futures were in New York for this year’s Interaction conference. It was uplifting, enlightening, inspiring, and exhausting. Here are the slides from our presentation - somehow we condensed 15 months of Crap Futures thinking into 20 minutes.
Of course design can be and do all of these things, but for the most part it has become so linked to the market and conspicuous consumption that it has essentially become a novelty machine.
This imposes constraints that limit the potential of design as a positive force. In this talk I’ll explore some of these constraints before suggesting ways of re-thinking them.
The first constraint is progress dogma.
Christian Schussele’s Men of Progress - a painting commissioned in 1857 to celebrate some of the key scientists and inventors that had positively altered the course of contemporary civilisation.
Despite powerful criticism - voiced over the past two centuries by Romantics such as William Blake, William Morris and the Arts and Crafts movement, and avant-garde provocateurs like Dada - the belief that technology will solve our problems remains largely pervasive.
According to Langdon Winner:
Not much has changed: think of Donald Trump’s 2016 meeting of leading technologists (more women than Men of Progress … but not many).
The power of Silicon Valley continues to shape all our futures: familiar utopian dreams made possible by advances in technology - smart everything, automation, robotics and so on.
Of course these things can improve people’s lives, but they can also disrupt enormously. This is the irony of the rise of Trump and the pro-leave EU campaign in the UK - the cry of immigrants taking jobs - that automation is a far more obvious threat but is rarely mentioned in these circles.
According to a 2016 report by the Eurasia Group consultancy, ‘the rise of technologists’ is one of the ‘top risks’ at present - due to the fact that ‘highly influential non-state actors from the world of technology are entering the realm of politics with unprecedented assertiveness’.
Removing the constraint of progress dogma means that we are not simply selling futures but also exploring what could go wrong - an approach we began developing in the early 2000s.
This is the audio tooth implant, developed with Jimmy Loizeau in 2001. Based on the growing ubiquity of mobile telephones we imagined that the next logical step would be for the phone to become part of our body. We pitched this as a semi-real concept at the Science Museum in London.
We sculpted a model tooth and cast it in clear resin with an old computer chip embedded in the middle.
It was broadly disseminated by the popular media - here on the front cover of Time magazine.
But this is an example of the true product here - a thoughtful and considered expert appraisal of what could go wrong - before it’s actually available. This aims to facilitate a more responsible approach to the technological future.
The second constraint is means and ends.
In the 1920s Paul Mazur of Lehman Brothers made the following statement, essentially signalling the rise of conspicuous consumption and the worship of gadgets. Designers were (and still are) complicit in this process.
Albert Borgmann has another way of describing it through his device paradigm: things are inseparable from their context: we engage and interact with them in their worlds. Devices, on the other hand, unburden us of their contexts through the operation of background machinery; the more advanced the technology, the more invisible or concealed the machinery. Borgmann used the fireplace as an example of a thing - it provides a focal point for the household, it links people to local terrains through the gathering of firewood and demands an idea of how much wood is required to get through the winter.
In contrast the central heating system disburdens us of all these other elements as the means become invisible - controlled and managed by others. Designers and consumers alike have become obsessed with the end - glossy glamorous products - whilst the systems behind become increasingly opaque.
This pathway essentially leads to automation - devices satisfying all of our needs as efficiently as possible through techniques such as machine learning, prediction algorithms and so on. Completely invisible, intangible, and operated by others.
Jean Baudrillard was already describing the consequences of automation in the 1960’s.
Removing the constraint of end focus encourages the designer to think beyond the generic solutions and objects of so-called desire to re-engage with local systems - making and materials.
This is an open-source hardware vacuum cleaner designer by Royal College of Art graduate Tom Lynch. All elements sourced or made locally and all documented on the project’s wiki - a fully functional product for under $50. The challenge is to combine the maker ideology with good design - the competition is strong as consumers are programmed to desire sexy products.
The OpenStructures WaterBoiler, originally designed and composed by Jesse Howard in collaboration with Thomas Lommée, provides some inspiration as to how this new aesthetic might be achieved.
Constraint No.3: Future Nudge We can only design what the product could realistically evolve into.
The economist Robert Heilbroner described the way technology (and therefore technological products) evolve - this means that what comes next will be similar to what came before.
The car is a good example. Travel is instrumentalised as we focus on the object rather than the act. It iterates in small steps made possible by advances in specific areas.
This constrains us to design only what the product could conceivably evolve into. Smart products, for example, are usually existing products simply updated with smart technology.
Mobile telephones provide another good example - 7 phones in 7 years - each a small advancement on the previous. Typical progression is derived from Moore’s law - smaller, more powerful, more efficient (more sales, revenue, etc.).
Re-constraining future nudge allows us to imagine what might happen should we step out of the lineage - to focus for example on how we might design for quality experiences.
The Iso-phone was developed in 2003 to re-think the telephone from the perspective of qualitative experience rather than efficiency.
The concept used sensory deprivation theory to a facilitate a reduction in sensory input - the only thing the wearer experiences is the voice of someone else arriving from somewhere else in the world. Here’s a short video of the project:
The final constraint is Infrastructure.
I’m going to explore the subject of energy, but infrastructural and legacy constraints inform almost everything we do and everything we design - from food systems to transport, manufacturing to entertainment.
Tesla’s invention of AC current afforded the building of huge power stations built in the countryside, generating power through the burning of fossil fuels.
Radially distributed across nations via grid systems …
Arriving magically at our houses via sockets in the walls. These sockets and the plugs that are inserted into them dictate how all electrical products are used and how all products are designed.
With my Crap Futures co-author Julian Hanna we have been thinking about how to re-constrain energy infrastructure on our home island of Madeira, based on the implementation of renewables.
As a place with ample sun, wind, rain, and sea it would be easy to assume that renewable approaches to energy would be thriving in Madeira. What you see when you fly over the island supports that notion: vast banks of solar photovoltaic panels line several of the exposed hillsides; wind farms are exposed to the full force of the gales blowing in from the Atlantic.
However, beneath the optimistic surface lies a darker reality.
The (oversimplified) problem is this:
Solar PVs only generate energy while the sun shines. Wind farms generate energy when the wind blows. The wind is unpredictable and the sun shines during the day when most people are at work, meaning that energy cannot realistically be consumed in real time. The only viable option at the moment is to sell energy back to the grid; unfortunately this conflicts with the power company’s business model. So while incentives seem to abound, the reality is that these incentives are diminishing. Portugal practices an instantaneous net-metering scheme, meaning that the energy generated by the PV system has to be consumed at the same instant that it is produced to be considered self-consumption. The grid injection tariff is four times lower than the consumption tariff, forcing solar producers to self-consume and not inject any solar power into the grid. As things stand, users of renewables still rely on the grid during dark or windless periods, and therefore utility owners argue - with some reason - that they should pay for grid upkeep.
While the infrastructure battle rages on, what else can be done?
By thinking about what’s beyond the wall - local contexts, landscapes, materials, skills, culture - it becomes possible to develop bespoke solutions. In Madeira that means cliffs and cliff-side communities. Many Madeiran communities are built on cliff-sides with drops ranging from a common 7-8 metres in the centre of Funchal to the 780 metre Cabo Girão on the south coast. These provide one solution to the storage issues that problematise solar panels - gravity batteries. The aim is to use locally sourced and inexpensive parts with minimal complex making.
We’re working on a book of 100 alternative energy ideas …
From small operational prototypes such as this low power gravity battery - exploiting the vertical nature of the island - to more spectacular, ambitious, even crazy concepts such as this huge series of elevators in our capital city of Funchal.
Inspired by the Neo-Gothic splendour of the Elevador de Santa Justa, Lisbon (1902):
Here’s a more serious prototype that we’re currently testing.
All parts are sourced or made locally. Solar energy lifts the mass during the daytime, storing it as potential energy. Allowing the mass to drop releases the energy when it is needed.
We have a mass - in this case around 15kg that rotates a pulley as it falls. This turns the shaft of a DC motor via a gear box, increasing the revolutions.
And the latest iteration: using a locally found scrap motorcycle engine as the gearbox, ready-made and super efficient, minimises complex making.
Finally, a video of the prototype - it’s a bit rough and ready as we only tested it last week (and I edited it on the plane over).
The best aspect of this design is the tangible relationship with energy that it affords. Turning up the volume makes the mass fall faster, reducing the time available to listen to the music. In the next steps we’re planning to boil a kettle and toast some bread …
Thanks for listening. Find out more by reading the rest of our blog.
Information Technology and Services | Kinneret Area, Israel, IL
I have been working as a contract technical writer at Intel Israel since 2003. In addition to writing documentation for complex, technical systems, I am responsible for updating the intranet sites for several products, and have provided user experience input at the relevant stages of product development. I do not require much in the way of direction or supervision. Once I know what I need to do, I do what it takes to get the right information from the right people (I’m not scared to look foolish by asking “stupid” questions), and then go heads-down to get the documentation done. I’m used to working in a team, but also enjoy the parts of the job that can only be done alone. I’m pretty tech-savvy—I’ve been involved with computers and technology since I was 11. Although I’m a technical writer, I have also picked up some web and programming skills along the way, and have built several websites. But my keen interest in the user experience field means that I always keep the end user and their needs in mind, whether I’m helping the developers figure out the layout of a screen or the flow of an interaction, or whether I’m writing the documentation that the user will turn to when they need to do something that they don’t know how to do yet.
2016 - Present
Technical Writer / Nagra Kudelski
Technical Writer / IFN Solutions
Technical Writer / Intel
Documenting several complex internal systems and regularly generating updated HTML and PDF versions of the documentation, for several different user types. This includes documentation for:
o Intel's grid computing system o The grid system’s API o Intel's storage management and replication system o A cache management system o A GUI application for submitting and tracking jobs in the grid system
I write documentation using both Adobe Framemaker (unstructured), WebWorks ePublisher, and DITA XML (using XMLMind XML Editor and the DITA Open Toolkit). I have also created and narrated a number of video tutorials.
Designing parts of the interface for:
o An internal file storage management system o A dashboard application for displaying data about Intel's grid computing system
It begins to look as if we might have been wrong. All those predictions driving us forward throughout history have brought us finally to the unexpected realisation that the future is, suddenly, no longer what it used to be. Oops.
James Burke is a living legend. Or, as he put it, “No-one under the age of fifty has heard of me and everyone over the age of fifty thinks I’m dead.”
He is a science historian, an author, and a television presenter. But calling James Burke a television presenter is like calling Mozart a busker. His 1978 series Connections and his 1985 series The Day The Universe Changed remain unparalleled pieces of television brilliance covering the history of science and technology.
Before making those astounding shows, he worked on Tomorrow’s World and went on to become the BBC’s chief reporter on the Apollo Moon missions.
His books include The Pinball Effect, The Knowledge Web, Twin Tracks and Circles.
In the latest London IA Podcast we host a wide-ranging conversation with Cennydd Bowles on moving from user experience design to digital product designer, what it takes to develop visual design skills, freelancing, A List Apart, writing a book, conference speaking and of course that legendary animal of European folklore.
Hosted by Matthew Solle and Andrew Travers. Produced by Will Myddelton and Matthew Solle.
Lately, Augmented Reality (AR) has come to stand for the highest and deepest form of synthesis between the digital and physical worlds. Slavin will outline an argument for rethinking what really augments reality and what the benefits are, as well as the costs.
Rather than considering AR as a technology, we will consider the goals we have for it, and how those are best addressed. Along the way, we’ll look at the history and future of seeing, with a series of stories, most of which are mostly true.
AR may be where all this goes. But how it gets there, and where there is, is up for debate. This is intended to serve to start or end that debate, or at a minimum, to bring the conference to a close by pointing at the future, perhaps in the wrong direction.
Kevin Slavin is the Managing Director and co-Founder of area/code. He has worked in corporate communications for technology-based clients for 13 years, including IBM, Compaq, Dell, TiVo, Time/Warner Cable, Microsoft, Wild Tangent and Qwest Wireless.
Slavin has lectured at the Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, the American Institute of Graphic Arts, and the Parsons School of Design, and has written for various publications on games and game culture. His work has received honors from the AIGA, the One Show, and the Art Directors Club, and he has exhibited internationally, including the Frankfurt Museum für Moderne Kunst.
As the times accelerate and we face ever more kaleidoscopic careers, a crucial meta-skill is the ability to learn new skills extremely rapidly, extremely well. That practice has no better exemplar and proponent than Timothy Ferriss, author of The 4-Hour Body: An Uncommon Guide to Rapid-Fat Loss, Incredible Sex, and Becoming Superhuman. Not surprisingly, he has made himself adept at compelling presentations, this one prepared especially for the Long Now audience.
Jarrett Walker talks to Gerry Gaffney about human transit, in a discussion that has many parallels for UX practitioners. "Think about the question," Jarrett tells us, "before you fall in love with a technology." He describes the need for ongoing education to help planners and residents understand that good transit promotes not just community building, but "the freedom and joy of individual humans." (August 2011.)
Languages are Parallel Universes
"To have a second language is to have a second soul," said Charlemagne around 800 AD. "Each language has its own cognitive toolkit," said psychologist/linguist Lera Boroditsky in 2010 AD.
Different languages handle verbs, distinctions, gender, time, space, metaphor, and agency differently, and those differences, her research shows, make people think and act differently.
In this episode, Paul talks with Paul Romer, Senior Fellow at the Stanford Center for International Development and the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. They discussed Romer's path as an academic turned entrepreneur, who returned to Stanford to explore how the startup dynamic could potentially be applied at the level of developing countries.