After hitting a dead end with the random website generator, I have decided to take a different path. My new idea came from looking at the website infosthetics.com. On there, they visualise data in lots of innovative ways. These two examples from the website use an algorithm based on the digits in Pi.
http://www.avoision.com/experiments/pi10k/index.php
http://flickr.com/photos/peewack/102585611/in/set-72157594180898707/
The music or image is made from the numbers, but are they picked at random? Not strictly, as the writer of the software is aware of the algorithm, and so has made a choice. Having said that, the list of digits has probably been pasted from somewhere like this:
http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~smillie/Pi10000.html
The algorithm and in fact the program have nothing to do with pi or with circles, but rather use the digits in pi as data. As most people only know pi up to 5 or so decimal places, the numbers after that are in a way being randomly selected.
A way to cancel any doubt as to whether this idea is random or not is to introduce input from a third party: Interactivity.
With the coloured pi image above, the colours were selected by the creator, which stopped it becoming random. If the colours were selected by someone else, simply asked to put a colour next to each digit and not told about the algorithm, you could say the colours have been randomly selected. The picture would look different every time too.
Algorithm + Interactivity = Random
I need to write a piece of software that just asks people to fill in text boxes, then uses that data to create some artworks.
Sunday, 11 January 2009
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
Design for Interactivity
My idea is based on people using the word 'random' incorrectly. It is a mathematical term meaning there is an equal chance of anything happening. For example if you roll a dice, there is an equal chance of any of the 6 numbers coming up, so the number is randomly selected.
People then starting using the word to represent a decision that appears to have been made randomly. For example if you put every possible colour into a hat, and picked one to be your hair colour, it is unlikely to be a normal hair colour pulled out. In life, however, there is not an equal chance of having black hair and having green hair. If somebody then dies their hair green, people might say "your hair is really random". This of course isn't random, as they chose green, unless they actually pulled the colours out of a hat, which is just strange.
Now, this bad use of 'random' has escalated, and people will say it when meaning something mildly different occurs. I hear things like "let's go to a few random pubs" which means "let's go a few pubs we have never been into before". In order to go to a random you could put the names of every pub in your City into a hat, and pick. Other random generators could be tossing a coin, spinning a bottle, rolling a dice, or using a calculator or computer's random function.
My idea is to search web 2.0 sites for people who use the word 'random' badly, and display a random site from within this search.
Initially I wanted to save the search results from just 'random' in a few web 2.0 sites, and then by clicking a button it would display a random page. This proved, after a couple of weeks trying, to be out of my range in terms of coding. It would require knowledge of xml, php and actionscript, and the ability to convert them in Python, a language used to write google applications.
I took a slightly easier route, and have had some success, with some help from Paul on the actionscript, and various forums and tutorials. I have managed to write a program that searches google for the word 'random' plus another random word, it then displays the top result from a randomly selected web 2.0 site.
There a couple of problems, firstly the display of the page only works 70% of the time for some unknown reason, and goes to a google search results page the rest of the time. Secondly, the other word being searched has to be pulled from a list, but I don't have one, and cannot find one to borrow (steal). The result being either I type every word I know, or get the user to type in their own word.
I have written the code for the user typing in their own word, but this no longer becomes random, and is selected by the user. I think I will have to try harder to get an array of words from the internet somewhere.
Please leave any suggestions as a comment, thanks.
People then starting using the word to represent a decision that appears to have been made randomly. For example if you put every possible colour into a hat, and picked one to be your hair colour, it is unlikely to be a normal hair colour pulled out. In life, however, there is not an equal chance of having black hair and having green hair. If somebody then dies their hair green, people might say "your hair is really random". This of course isn't random, as they chose green, unless they actually pulled the colours out of a hat, which is just strange.
Now, this bad use of 'random' has escalated, and people will say it when meaning something mildly different occurs. I hear things like "let's go to a few random pubs" which means "let's go a few pubs we have never been into before". In order to go to a random you could put the names of every pub in your City into a hat, and pick. Other random generators could be tossing a coin, spinning a bottle, rolling a dice, or using a calculator or computer's random function.
My idea is to search web 2.0 sites for people who use the word 'random' badly, and display a random site from within this search.
Initially I wanted to save the search results from just 'random' in a few web 2.0 sites, and then by clicking a button it would display a random page. This proved, after a couple of weeks trying, to be out of my range in terms of coding. It would require knowledge of xml, php and actionscript, and the ability to convert them in Python, a language used to write google applications.
I took a slightly easier route, and have had some success, with some help from Paul on the actionscript, and various forums and tutorials. I have managed to write a program that searches google for the word 'random' plus another random word, it then displays the top result from a randomly selected web 2.0 site.
There a couple of problems, firstly the display of the page only works 70% of the time for some unknown reason, and goes to a google search results page the rest of the time. Secondly, the other word being searched has to be pulled from a list, but I don't have one, and cannot find one to borrow (steal). The result being either I type every word I know, or get the user to type in their own word.
I have written the code for the user typing in their own word, but this no longer becomes random, and is selected by the user. I think I will have to try harder to get an array of words from the internet somewhere.
Please leave any suggestions as a comment, thanks.
Monday, 17 November 2008
Total Voice Recognition
I have firmly chosen my idea, it is to be the Total Voice Recognition.
Recent technologies in the area of voice activated computers are much better than they have been. In talk-to-type systems like 'Dragon Naturally Speaking 10' there is a much higher success rate than before, with now just 1% of words being mis-heard. There is also a limited increase in the Artificial Intelligence of the software; you can give instructions such as "bold that" or "left align that" which can tell the difference between dictation and instruction based on tone of voice.
There is also software available for Mac called Dictate which goes the extra step and is used across the operating system, to open software or even select tools in Photoshop. It is combined with the computer's own speech software, which means you can ask the time and be told by the machine, without using anything but a microphone.
My idea has been slightly covered already, and so I must think of the next stage in this speech control evolution. Multi-Touch systems combined with Total Voice Recognition would alleviate the need for a mouse or keyboard altogether, but it could go further and limit the number of software interfaces needed. The biggest and most obvious example would be the internet: If you need a quick piece of information such as a train time you could simply ask the computer, who would understand the question, search the internet and respond as quickly as possible. You could set up a system of favourites (e.g. railenquiries.com) so the search, and therefore the response you are after are instant.
You: "Computer, When is the next train from Brighton to Victoria?"
Computer: "The next train from Brighton to Victoria is at 3.40"
You: "Thanks"
The result of this service would mean individual websites of data could be avoided, rather people would get all of their information via one source. Potentially, if the software was intelligent enough, blind internet users could get information as quickly and easily as everyone else.
The progression from there would be that you have a separate machine, a computer with no display, that works only on a speech input and speech output system, searching the internet for information and relaying it back to you. It would have to work 100% of the time, or else not be worth having, so the intelligence of the searches would have to be outstanding. This is currently not likely to happen, but is certainly possible in the future.
Recent technologies in the area of voice activated computers are much better than they have been. In talk-to-type systems like 'Dragon Naturally Speaking 10' there is a much higher success rate than before, with now just 1% of words being mis-heard. There is also a limited increase in the Artificial Intelligence of the software; you can give instructions such as "bold that" or "left align that" which can tell the difference between dictation and instruction based on tone of voice.
There is also software available for Mac called Dictate which goes the extra step and is used across the operating system, to open software or even select tools in Photoshop. It is combined with the computer's own speech software, which means you can ask the time and be told by the machine, without using anything but a microphone.
My idea has been slightly covered already, and so I must think of the next stage in this speech control evolution. Multi-Touch systems combined with Total Voice Recognition would alleviate the need for a mouse or keyboard altogether, but it could go further and limit the number of software interfaces needed. The biggest and most obvious example would be the internet: If you need a quick piece of information such as a train time you could simply ask the computer, who would understand the question, search the internet and respond as quickly as possible. You could set up a system of favourites (e.g. railenquiries.com) so the search, and therefore the response you are after are instant.
You: "Computer, When is the next train from Brighton to Victoria?"
Computer: "The next train from Brighton to Victoria is at 3.40"
You: "Thanks"
The result of this service would mean individual websites of data could be avoided, rather people would get all of their information via one source. Potentially, if the software was intelligent enough, blind internet users could get information as quickly and easily as everyone else.
The progression from there would be that you have a separate machine, a computer with no display, that works only on a speech input and speech output system, searching the internet for information and relaying it back to you. It would have to work 100% of the time, or else not be worth having, so the intelligence of the searches would have to be outstanding. This is currently not likely to happen, but is certainly possible in the future.
Dissertation
This morning we ran through initial ideas for our dissertations. I hadn't thought about it until asked this morning, but I had two thoughts, both of which might be problematic: I thought maybe I'd write about mathematics, especially phi in design of all kinds, but this idea has been taken by somebody else, which could prove problematic. I also considered writing about TV, especially American TV series such as HBO's The Wire, The Sopranos and Deadwood. There are loads of ideas I have on this subject, but the problem is that I wrote an essay on this topic in the first year of the course, and I might plagiarise myself.
This means I either have to come up with a new question and set of research, or think of a new topic altogether.
This means I either have to come up with a new question and set of research, or think of a new topic altogether.
Tuesday, 11 November 2008
I haven't updated for a while, but here are my most recent activities.
There were 6 ideas:
1. Social TV - Chat whilst flicking through channels in case you find something good. See what your friends are watching.
2. Digital Odours - Smells can be captured by a device, then emailed and reproduced by others. Could also be used in cinema, TV or consoles to aid immesion in the media.
3. Total Voice Recognition - Operate the entire computer with muti-touch and voice, or voice alone.
4. 4D imagery - Impossible for humans to see, a computer will be able to generate 4 dimensional imagery.
5. Future Internet Dating - Virtual reality dates, using face-mapping to ease cyber-couples into real life meetings.
6. Retro Websites - A future movement by those tired of web 2.0's domination, bringing back cloud wallpapers, frames and animated gifs.
Of these 6, I have put the most thought into the Digital Odours and the Total Voice Recognition. I currently want to go with Total Voice Recognition as Digital Odours have already been launched and failed (see Digiscents iSmell and Smell-O-Vision). I also see Total Voice Recognition as both the most interesting and most likely of all my ideas.
I need to think about the AI that would be essential in getting the technology to work. This means I need to look at the way people type or write, and how that is different from how they speak, and how a system could work that speeds up rather than slows down the process.
I should not get caught up in the technical/electronic side of things, as this technlogy is currently unavailable and I am not an inventor. That being said, I have thought of a solution to the technical problem of many people in an office/class talking at once: Use vocoder technology, like in the Talk Box, which requires you only to mouth the words rather than speak them aloud.
It can also be used to create funky sounds.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=RQfZRRRo_8A&feature=related
There were 6 ideas:
1. Social TV - Chat whilst flicking through channels in case you find something good. See what your friends are watching.
2. Digital Odours - Smells can be captured by a device, then emailed and reproduced by others. Could also be used in cinema, TV or consoles to aid immesion in the media.
3. Total Voice Recognition - Operate the entire computer with muti-touch and voice, or voice alone.
4. 4D imagery - Impossible for humans to see, a computer will be able to generate 4 dimensional imagery.
5. Future Internet Dating - Virtual reality dates, using face-mapping to ease cyber-couples into real life meetings.
6. Retro Websites - A future movement by those tired of web 2.0's domination, bringing back cloud wallpapers, frames and animated gifs.
Of these 6, I have put the most thought into the Digital Odours and the Total Voice Recognition. I currently want to go with Total Voice Recognition as Digital Odours have already been launched and failed (see Digiscents iSmell and Smell-O-Vision). I also see Total Voice Recognition as both the most interesting and most likely of all my ideas.
I need to think about the AI that would be essential in getting the technology to work. This means I need to look at the way people type or write, and how that is different from how they speak, and how a system could work that speeds up rather than slows down the process.
I should not get caught up in the technical/electronic side of things, as this technlogy is currently unavailable and I am not an inventor. That being said, I have thought of a solution to the technical problem of many people in an office/class talking at once: Use vocoder technology, like in the Talk Box, which requires you only to mouth the words rather than speak them aloud.
It can also be used to create funky sounds.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=RQfZRRRo_8A&feature=related
Monday, 27 October 2008
Dystopia
In this project there is much potential to look at past visions of the future, and the often satirical or ridiculous inventions and ways of life portrayed in novels and films. The dystopian futures shown in many of these pieces are often reflections on the time that they were made or written, and often not genuine predictions. That being said, aspects of these fictional works have come true long after they were thought up.
The most obvious example of a dystopian future coming true is 1984. George Orwell's 1948 novel had grim visions of the mid eighties, most prevalently the idea of 'Big Brother'. This idea, at the time just speculation, was essentially that of modern day CCTV - the thought of constantly being watched. This was combined with other concepts made famous by socialist authors after the First World War, novels such as Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World' and Yevgeny Zamyatin's 'We' use the concepts of '2 + 2 = 5', and people being numbered and entered into giant government databases. All of these concepts are beginning to come into play, with the idea of ID cards in the UK being the latest step towards a 1984 for this century.
One film that's imagery and ideas have survived into the future they were predicting is Terry Gilliam's 1985 comedy Brazil. Apparently Brazil was once under the working title of 'Monty Python's 1984' and you can see why. As well as the pollution, Brazil makes satire of beaurocracy, with the single nationwide corporation 'Ministry of Information'. There is also a big emphasis on terrorist bombings, which have been in the news every day since 2001.
With these dystopian works of fiction being some of the best predictions of the future, perhaps for my Design Futures I should look at what we would not like to see, or if all the things we don't like at the moment being continued for 10 years. That way I might actually make an accurate prediction.
The most obvious example of a dystopian future coming true is 1984. George Orwell's 1948 novel had grim visions of the mid eighties, most prevalently the idea of 'Big Brother'. This idea, at the time just speculation, was essentially that of modern day CCTV - the thought of constantly being watched. This was combined with other concepts made famous by socialist authors after the First World War, novels such as Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World' and Yevgeny Zamyatin's 'We' use the concepts of '2 + 2 = 5', and people being numbered and entered into giant government databases. All of these concepts are beginning to come into play, with the idea of ID cards in the UK being the latest step towards a 1984 for this century.
One film that's imagery and ideas have survived into the future they were predicting is Terry Gilliam's 1985 comedy Brazil. Apparently Brazil was once under the working title of 'Monty Python's 1984' and you can see why. As well as the pollution, Brazil makes satire of beaurocracy, with the single nationwide corporation 'Ministry of Information'. There is also a big emphasis on terrorist bombings, which have been in the news every day since 2001.
With these dystopian works of fiction being some of the best predictions of the future, perhaps for my Design Futures I should look at what we would not like to see, or if all the things we don't like at the moment being continued for 10 years. That way I might actually make an accurate prediction.
Sunday, 26 October 2008
PC World - The 25 Worst Tech Products of All Time
http://www.pcworld.com/article/125772/the_25_worst_tech_products_of_all_time.html
The idea of looking at this article was to see what makes a bad media-related invention. It emerged during a search on the subject of iSmell (which finished 24th), but includes software as well as physical creations. There are some features which are apparent across the list; most fundamentally is the concept itself, some of which are quite ridiculous. Priceline.com were selling cheap petrol online, it would arrive a few days after ordering in the form of a card which could only then be used in a very select few petrol stations. Another reason for many of the things being on this list is that they were badly made and would often break, which is not the sign of a bad idea, but of bad manufacturing and is not really to be considered when thinking about Design Futures.
There are two more reasons for concepts making this unfortunate quarter-century, both of which are through the tech being released too early. In the case of some software, such as (no. 4) Disney's The Lion King CD-ROM for Windows, there was a requirement for a cutting edge graphics card that was mostly unobtainable for everyday Windows users. Hardware technologies have also failed through being released too soon, like in the case of iSmell, which didn't catch on because the technology was ahead of it's time, and cost too much for the consumer. However, it is possible that people also just don't want to smell websites. I think if angled correctly, marketed well and made both available and cheap, the idea of digital smells could catch on.
The idea of looking at this article was to see what makes a bad media-related invention. It emerged during a search on the subject of iSmell (which finished 24th), but includes software as well as physical creations. There are some features which are apparent across the list; most fundamentally is the concept itself, some of which are quite ridiculous. Priceline.com were selling cheap petrol online, it would arrive a few days after ordering in the form of a card which could only then be used in a very select few petrol stations. Another reason for many of the things being on this list is that they were badly made and would often break, which is not the sign of a bad idea, but of bad manufacturing and is not really to be considered when thinking about Design Futures.
There are two more reasons for concepts making this unfortunate quarter-century, both of which are through the tech being released too early. In the case of some software, such as (no. 4) Disney's The Lion King CD-ROM for Windows, there was a requirement for a cutting edge graphics card that was mostly unobtainable for everyday Windows users. Hardware technologies have also failed through being released too soon, like in the case of iSmell, which didn't catch on because the technology was ahead of it's time, and cost too much for the consumer. However, it is possible that people also just don't want to smell websites. I think if angled correctly, marketed well and made both available and cheap, the idea of digital smells could catch on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)