Live data from Hacker News

A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

worrydream.com

131–140 of 156 posts

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? The basic text -- 12 px Arial? -- is pretty standard. I'm sure I'm not the only person who read it without issue. But what's more -- unlike most things I read online -- this essay even has text that's much bigger!, darker!, blue-er!, and illustration-y! where appropriate. That's perhaps the most snide, trollish, unimportant pot shot I've ever seen here. Don't blame the author because your…

It's a web font, PT Sans, it ends up being smaller than Arial or Helvetica because of the awkward smoothing.

kitsune, I think you have identified the issue. It might look better on a different platform. I'm stuck on Windows XP at work (and yes, I do have Clear Type turned on.)

I stand by my criticism of the font choice as rendered. I went in with Google Chrome Inspector and turned off the font and the color and was much happier with the result.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#132
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same on laptops, if i'm in a coffeshop and forgot to turn the volume down and suddenly some video starts playing at full volume, i want to be able to quickly turn down a physical dial to zero, that would take me under 0.1 seconds. Not press fn+F11 ten times which takes almost a second.

In general, I agree, but that is the use case for the mute button.

Which is also digital! Fumble for the fn and esc keys as music blasts out of your laptop and people turn around to look at you.

Bonus points if the software the receives fn key presses don't work instantly, and there's a half second lag, during which you mash the keys again and negate the mute.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#133
post #120
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess it's meant to depict a not so distant future. Either that, or you could criticise the Office team for not having the imagination to take it any further. Kids are still taught long division? Why? Same reason people learn it today, same reason we didn't stop the second the slide rule was invented or cheap calculators became available 20 years ago or whenever. Learning simple algorithms is important for future d…

Well - those were just quick reactions I had to the video. But, I think if I could now somehow set my own childhood educational curriculum, I don't think long division would be on it. I don't think I know how to do long division, at the moment. I certainly haven't done it in very many years. I suspect very few people ever do it. Computers even follow different algorithms. I would definitely agree that learning simple…

Arithmetic is totally abstracted away in virtually every language we use today.

I don't think it's safe to assume binary search won't be similarly abstracted away in 20 years (to the point that even embedded developers are using something with extremely expressive template algorithms built in.)

Best to start with the bare minimum. Given a set of numbers, how do you add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Granted, it's not too unreasonable to consider a machine that has no divide instruction, but it's still a basic computer algorithm that's within the reach of computers. I think the big problem is that people don't have a grasp that computers compute things in a manner not too different from how we do it by hand (and that we can use more advanced computer methods by hand to good effect.)

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smell is an interesting one. Memory along with visual is tied to smells. A lot of UI is based off of memory recognition. It would neat to see a UI based off of smell (i.e. smell flowers if hit right button)

That would be so cool! I bet it would also be useful for educational software. You load up the chem program for the first time in months, and immediately smell your studying chem smell , lets say hazelnut coffee, and the memories start flowing back.

What would be cool is if you could (optionally) smell the chemicals you're learning about to further cement them in your memory.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#135
post #118

The author makes a very valid point, and it would be quite interesting to see what kinds of tactile UI designs might be achieved. But I think there's an important distinction to be made in how we build tools to solve physical problems and how we build tools to solve conceptual ones. Apart from purely remediative technologies such as Braille, I can't think of any technology from any era of human history in which conce…

You should check out the book The Myth of the Paperless Office. They report research where they gave folks tasks like writing a summary of several magazine articles and one group did it all on a computer and the other did it on paper and they watched how people actually worked. There was a lot of subtle physical interactions in the paper group, such as moving different articles closer and farther away on the table that the computer group tried to do analogues of and failed because of the limitations of the medium. So it's not just the eyes and ears.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#136

I've never considered the richness of normal interaction in comparison to the "picture behind glass" model. Very eye opening read. However, "Do you know what it's called when you lose all sense of touch? It's called paralysis, and they push you around in a wheelchair while you calculate black hole radiation." isn't cool at all.

He's making a specific point regarding the relative importance of our senses. On the surface level, vision seems to play a far more important role in human life than tactile sensation.

Losing your sight (the sense screens use) results in a normal person who has to make a few adjustments to accomodate their blindness. Losing your sense of touch (the sense that touchscreens can't use) is paradoxically far more debilitating.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#137

I've never considered the richness of normal interaction in comparison to the "picture behind glass" model. Very eye opening read. However, "Do you know what it's called when you lose all sense of touch? It's called paralysis, and they push you around in a wheelchair while you calculate black hole radiation." isn't cool at all.

He's making a specific point regarding the relative importance of our senses. On the surface level, vision seems to play a far more important role in human life than tactile sensation.

Losing your sight (the sense screens use) results in a normal person who has to make a few adjustments to accomodate their blindness. Losing your sense of touch (the sense that touchscreens can't use) is paradoxically far more debilitating.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#138
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well - those were just quick reactions I had to the video. But, I think if I could now somehow set my own childhood educational curriculum, I don't think long division would be on it. I don't think I know how to do long division, at the moment. I certainly haven't done it in very many years. I suspect very few people ever do it. Computers even follow different algorithms. I would definitely agree that learning simple…

Arithmetic is totally abstracted away in virtually every language we use today. I don't think it's safe to assume binary search won't be similarly abstracted away in 20 years (to the point that even embedded developers are using something with extremely expressive template algorithms built in.) Best to start with the bare minimum. Given a set of numbers, how do you add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Granted, it's n…

I think, we've reached this situation, where huge numbers of people, across different professions, need to manipulate data.

For the last 10/20 years, the dominant paradigm for data manipulation, was probably the spreadsheet. Spreadsheets give an enormous amount of power, for relatively little investment. So, now, a wide range of professionals - business analysts, geologists, even engineers, use spreadsheets as their standard data manipulation tools.

But I think we've entered a world where data manipulation is so central, that spreadsheets just aren't a powerful enough paradigm for these jobs.

At the moment, I feel that the best way for manipulating data, is probably a general purpose programming language, like Python. I would advise people starting a career in information work ( anyone that does advanced data processing and analysis - which is a great many people, these days), to try and learn to program. I see a lot of merit to the argument that programming is becoming a basic professional skill, like literacy did.

(I would advise something like Python, over something like R, or even Matlab; I think its just semantically more consistent, and cleaner. This is completely a personal opinion, but I think R, in its present form, will ultimately be considered a failure, as a data manipulation tool.)

Given this worldview, it'd make a lot of sense to _currently_ be teaching binary search, in school, rather than long division.

Now, programming languages are probably the best general purpose data manipulation tools we have currently, but, for all their power, I suspect that future generations will look back on what we use now, as we look back on writing machine code - a painstaking, and primitive exercise. There's plenty of people trying to build more powerful general data manipulation tools, at present, but I've yet to see something thats a convincing advance over both the spreadsheet, and the general purpose programming language.

But, even if we do have better data manipulation paradigms in future, where the binary search is completely abstracted away from the data manipulator, then I would still guess that it might make more sense to teach school kids binary search rather than long division.

I don't accept the argument that long division is in some sense more primitive, or more 'bare minimum', than binary search is. It is, in the order we currently teach things; but I don't see that order as at all fundamental. I think from an algorithmic worldview, binary search is a pretty fundamental operation. You can do a lot of algorithms before you need to divide anything - why not have them come first?

I'm not saying this is the definitive world view to have, and 'binary search' is just an example here; but I am saying that I don't see why we have to be so focused on the arithmetic-centred view of things; and I would hope that 'in the future' we'd have moved beyond that. Fewer and fewer people are going to have any experience with complex arithmetic, but more and more of them are going to have to manipulate data.

I don't think we give a lot of importance to childrens time at the moment; I think they are sent to spend time doing long division because thats what they've always been sent to do; but I think that this might all be about to change, as education is coming into line for some massive disruption.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#139
I'm actually surprised no one has mentioned Rainbows End by Vernor Vinge yet. He actually presents a vision of a very natural, expressive near future UI.

While he doesn't go into technical details about everything, he does describe interacting with "Ubiquity" through small gestures throughout the body, whether small shrugs or interacting with hands. Further, he touches on the issues surrounding flat interfaces and even the virtual 3D interfaces.

And that's just the UI side of the novel.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#140

Great post. Has there been any interaction research done on using something like a stress ball as an interaction device for digital environment? In my imagination a ball would have standard accelerometers and gyroscopes, but in addition fine-grained sensing capabilities to sense different kind of grips. It could also provide tactile feedback.

Actually, we (me and a student) have built exactly such a device this year. Did not have time to finish and evaluate it yet, however. Some papers on grasp interaction with spherical objects: Tango: www.cs.mcgill.ca/~kry/pubs/iser/iser.pdf Graspables: www.media.mit.edu/~vmb/papers/chi09.pdf Grasp Sensing for HCI (my paper, more generic): http://www.medien.ifi.lmu.de/pubdb/publications/pub/wimmer20...

That's awesome! What kind of system you use to sense different grips, i.e. what kind of sensors there are inside the "ball".
Post reply on HN