Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Handhelds Hardware

Life Imitates Art at Intel 90

Posted by michael from the ships-passing-in-the-night dept.
figa writes "Eric Paulos and Elizabeth Goodman at Intel's Research Laboratory at Berkeley are using the Situationists' exploration of urban space and psychologist Stanley Milgram's social experiments to design wearable devices."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Life Imitates Art at Intel More

Life Imitates Art at Intel

Comments Filter:

  • pssst.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Friday May 14, 2004 @11:46PM (#9159305) Homepage Journal
    I hope they figure out a way to discreetly "wink" to a stranger in the room, without invading their privacy, or already having their phone#, over a mobile phone.
    • Parent reminds me of the Futurama episode where they connect to the internet, and Leela ends up in a sex chatroom. One of the chatters looks over at Leela, his head suddenly turns into a blank white circle, it turns, and Leela gets a ;).

  • Situationism (Score:4, Funny)

    by Aardpig ( 622459 ) on Friday May 14, 2004 @11:49PM (#9159314)

    From one of the links:

    Our conception of a "constructed situation" is not limited to an integrated use of artistic means to create an ambiance, however great the force or spatiotemporal extent of that ambiance might be. A situation is also an integrated ensemble of behavior in time. It is composed of actions contained in a transitory decor. These actions are the product of the decor and of themselves, and they in their turn produce other decors and other actions. How can these forces be oriented?

    Call me a philestine, but I have no *fucking* idea of whether it's good or whether it's whack.

    • Re:Situationism (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 15, 2004 @12:15AM (#9159398)
      Call me a philestine, but I have no *fucking* idea of whether it's good or whether it's whack.

      It's good and it's whack. The reason you can't make head nor tail of this is because you must first perform a paradigm shift of your perception. Then you will see that what matters most is not content but impressions about what you read. Then even if the description doesn't make any sense by itself, the impression that it radiate acts as the most precise description of it.

      • Re:Situationism (Score:4, Funny)

        by stienman ( 51024 ) <adavis&ubasics,com> on Saturday May 15, 2004 @12:32AM (#9159451) Homepage Journal
        The reason you can't make head nor tail of this is because you must first perform a paradigm shift of your perception.

        Just a word of warning - whenever you suggest to someone that they shift their paradigm, keep in mind that they may not have a clutch! This will explain the awful grinding noise and possible brain stalling that follows.

        You've been warned.

        -Adam
    • I think the answer is South or Slantways.

    • !Situationism (Score:1, Informative)

      by daniil ( 775990 )
      a tiny nitpick: there is no such thing as 'situationism.' see, for instance, the wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] on 'situationist':

      The journal Internationale Situationniste defined situationist as "having to do with the theory or practical activity of constructing situations." The same journal defined situationism as "a meaningless term improperly derived from the above. There is no such thing as situationism, which would mean a doctrine of interpretation of existing facts. The notion of situationism is obviously devise

  • That's interesting... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Bishop, Martin ( 695163 ) on Friday May 14, 2004 @11:51PM (#9159320)
    Imagine bluetooth enabled wearable computers, that could become clusters when in close proximity of each other. Image everyone at a soccer game wearing them; not only do you get to enjoy the game, but you make one huge super cluster.

  • Hope it's not based on this experiment... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pegasustonans ( 589396 ) on Saturday May 15, 2004 @12:02AM (#9159354)
    I hope they're not designing the devices based on the experiment where Milgram asked subjects to electrocute other people strapped to chairs for getting answers to simple questions wrong. (They weren't really getting electrocuted, but they acted as though they were) Though, I guess it might be kind of funny.
    The history of that experiment wasn't very humorous, however, as several participants sustained substantial psychological damage after they later realized they'd been willing to essentially kill another person via electrocution with only simple prodding to justify it. (This is one of the more interesting experiments along these lines that happened in the last half-century)
    • All I can say to that really is that it serves them right for being sheep.
    • I hope they're not designing the devices based on the experiment where Milgram asked subjects to electrocute other people strapped to chairs for getting answers to simple questions wrong. (They weren't really getting electrocuted, but they acted as though they were)

      That's being studied at the Abu Ghraib Research Center.

      The subject stands on a box with his head covered by a hood, and pretty soon.... the honor of the United States is eternally blemished and we are all shamed.

      We're all "Good Germans" now.

    • Actual method of Milgram Obedience Study... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Miaowara_Tomokato ( 757775 ) on Saturday May 15, 2004 @01:51AM (#9159702)
      Following is a summary of the Milgram study to clarify misinformation in the parent post; a full explanation can be found in The Perils of Obedience [swbell.net], penned by Stanley Milgram. Additionally, a participant in the original experiment writes his personal account here [jewishcurrents.org]; other discussion [kuro5hin.org] abounds.

      The goal of Milgram's research was to see how people reacted to an authority figure telling them to administer electric shocks to a victim in the next room which would then protest in varying degrees depending on the amount of shock (actually a tape recording). These shocks were to be given when the 'subject' misperformed a simple memory task. With each wrong answer, the voltage of the shock was increased, starting at 14 volts ranging to 450 at the high end. The switches were labeled in groups of four, starting with 'slight shock' and the final two switches marked merely with 'XXX'.

      The responses given by the 'subject' (who mentions his heart condition at some point) are: a grunt at 45 volts, loud complaining at 120v, an agonized scream at 285v, then eventually silence in response to the highest levels.

      If the participant giving the shocks complained, the experimenter (Played by a tall, deep-voiced man dressed very scientist-y) as the authority figure told them to continue. Depending on the number of times a participant complained, they were told something else by the experimenter. These were:
      'the experiment requires that you continue'
      'it is essential that we continue'
      'you have no other choice'

      If the participant refused to continue after the final imperative, the experiment was halted. Milgram had predicted that only 4% of the participants would reach the 300 volt mark, and only 1 in 1000 would deliver the highest shock possible.

      A full 25 of the 40 participants delivered the full range of shock. The experimenter halted the session the third time a 450 volt shock was delivered. This result generalizes across race, sex, country of origin and social status. Many of the participants did show signs of extreme stress towards the end of the experiment (clenching fists, laughter, squinting, sweating). Many people allege that there were long term effects (a la Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder), though no one seems able to cite these cases. Many of the people in their short-term responses reported that they felt that overall it was a positive experience in which they could learn about themselves. Of course, that could just be a coping strategy to help deal with the trauma. People are built mentally tough, it is a rare person that would have severe long-term effects from this one isolated experiment.
      • Thanks for the clarifications there.

        As a further clarification on my previous post I would like to note that by 'substantial psychological damage' I did not necessarily mean 'long term.' I think it's relatively difficult to dispute that many of those involved in the experiment seem to have suffered significant trauma at the time. In my opinion the experiment was unethical for this reason. However, that does not mean that I am blind to the results and their implications as well.
        I respect most of Milgram'
        • Determining whether an experiment was a 'good' one is a subjective process. The quantitative data provided from Stanley Milgram's experiment has been of significant value in many cross-disciplinary fields. As people become more aware of their susceptibility to perceived and actual authority, the more likely they will exercise independent critical thinking. This is a good thing.
          • I've already mentioned that I'm not blind to the positive insights that resulted from the experiment. Of course, you're absolutely correct in stating that deciding whether an experiment is 'good' is a subjective process. However, I fail to see how this adds to the discussion.
            In the end, all 'processes' are subjective including your qualification that more people exercising critical thinking is a 'good' thing. I'm not saying I disagree with you, but the subjective nature of your own argument would suggest
      • Obedience to Authority [amazon.com] is also written by Milgram about his experiment but now I'm wondering what I missed from the Perils of Disobedience.
        Anyway, if you're looking for a recent account of the effects studied by Milgram check here [google.com] and remember, that which has affected those affects you.

  • Recommended Reading (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pegasustonans ( 589396 ) on Saturday May 15, 2004 @12:09AM (#9159372)
    I highly recommend Steven Strogatz' book "Sync" and also Mark Buchanan's book "Nexus" for more in-depth information about the small-world theory and its relation to complex networks and human interaction.
  • I hope everyone realizes the irony in (ab)using situational theory to produce desire. But I guess there's no real irony anymore...
    • I hope everyone realizes the irony in (ab)using situational theory to produce desire

      I rather think that the irony has long been evacuated from this particular issue since Situationist theory has been regularly used to market various commodities and 'yoof lifestyles' since the late seventies now.

      See, for example, Factory Records, Malcolm McLaren and the Sex Pistols, etc.

      Sadly, Gil Scott Heron was very, very wrong.

  • But (Score:3, Interesting)

    by acceber ( 777067 ) on Saturday May 15, 2004 @12:15AM (#9159395)
    By definition a Familiar Stranger (1) must be observed, (2) repeatedly, and (3) without any interaction.
    But it is interaction, just not of the conventional sort. The two agents mutually interact by agreeing to not directly interact with one another. They say so themselves: The claim is that the relationship we have with these Familiar Strangers is indeed a real relationship in which both parties agree to mutually ignore each other

    If A identifies B as a familiar stranger, then wouldn't B most likely identify A as a familiar stranger also?
    A real relationship requires interaction (even if it is to ignore each other), so if a familiar stranger is a relationship without any interaction, is it a relationship at all?

  • Not likely (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Saturday May 15, 2004 @12:19AM (#9159408) Homepage
    While I don't think this particular application is going to be the "killer app", I did read something similar in yesterday's Circuits section of the NY Times.

    It was about a service called Dodgeball which basically takes the whole concept of Social Networks that's been the recent fad, and puts it in cellphone form. You can send out a message, and friends and friends of friends can see where you are, and a picture of you.

    When I was in the UK I heard about a similar service which was basically like Match.com for the cellphone.

    I think that once these are developed further, and people become more accustomed to them, it will be quite common to meet new people on the street through the medium of technology like this.

    The good news is the technology isn't that complicated, its the whole hurdle of social acceptance that will make or break its success.

    I hope that if it doesn't take off here in the states, it at least becomes mainstream in the UK and Japan which tend to be more open to those sorts of thing.

    • I think that once these are developed further, and people become more accustomed to them, it will be quite common to meet new people on the street through the medium of technology like this.

      It's funny that if you go up to a complete stranger on the street, say hi and introduce yourself, they'll look at you like you're a complete whacko. But if you put yourself behind a keyboard (or a cell phone, in this case), it becomes a lot more acceptable.

      The irony of it is, we all want social interaction, but w

      • 'The irony of it is, we all want social interaction, but we all want it through inherently less social mediums (at least initially)."

        Perhaps because if things don't work right you can always blame the technology.

        "Oh, my cellphone said you would be interested in talking to me, my mistake."

  • Wearable device sizing? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I hope the put more thought into the sizing of these wearable devices than you see in normal clothing departments!

    I'm 5'3", 125 lbs, but with 34DD boobs...yeah, the mall is a nightmare. Everything is made for all-over petites with small chests, or for people with big boobs and big waists. Whatever happened to the small people with curves?

    Swim suit season is a bitch. I can't remember the last time I bought a swim suit that a)I liked, and b)fit right.

  • Americans re-reading Europe, yet again (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Pac ( 9516 ) <paulo...candido@@@gmail...com> on Saturday May 15, 2004 @12:42AM (#9159490)
    European philosophy and European social science ideas in general have an amazing tendency to get heavily suggared when crossing the Atlantic. Being Intel one of those quintessential American companies, I guess one shouldn't be surprised. Hasn't anyone warned this guys that Guy Debord [nothingness.org] is really dead [lutherblissett.net]?

  • Anonymous sex with familiar strangers (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Bluetooth enabled.

    Toothing? [lumberjack.be]

  • Did they really mean to say "pubic" at the end of the first paragraph??
    -russ
    • We describe several experiments and studies that lead to a design for a personal, body-worn, wireless device that extends the Familiar Stranger relationship while respecting the delicate, yet important, constraints of our feelings and relationships with strangers in pubic places.

      I think they are considering putting computers down there but they aren't sure if people are ready to extend the "Familiar Stranger" relationship.. or something.
    • I noticed that too. Freudian slip or typo? With enough grant money I'm sure someone can find out.
  • so does this project mean the possibilty of the future bringing a device by which i'll know when walking down the street:

    a) if that hot girl i caught eyes with thinks i'm hot...
    b) i'll get spam while walking to the bus...
    c) how ugly "rawkgrrl2004" really is...

    this opens a whole new world to hackers...
  • I'm looking forward to when my underwear vibrates to let me know that I've got an incoming message.

  • Hrm (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Has anyone done any studies that have pointed to the opposite? That people are encumbered by too many gadgets, and work best with limited exposure?

    I've seen too many people who use PDAs, making it harder for them to get things done (have to spend 5x as long writing information compared to using a pen/paper)

    Like what you hear? Read my blog [google.com]
  • To judge [intel-research.net] from [intel-research.net] their sample scenarios [intel-research.net] they're building a doohickey that tells you whether you a) have seen people before or else b) feel socially awkward in a given situation - but only if everyone else is wearing the same doohickey.

    Intel must have a lot of cash to burn. They're paying these people to reinvent what the human brain already does better than anything else [cnn.com] in order to solve the first problem. For the second problem, the fancy social type events they're hoping to hock this to have already had [newscientist.com]
    • One of the scenarios [intel-research.net] describes a guy who uses his device to check if a group strangers are familiar to eachother. How does this work? Does his device send a query to tell ask them if they know eachother? Would it be easy for the strangers in the room to send an untrue response to such a query?
    • Your mother discovers that you has been hanging out with the wrong kids in school. One day she borrows your doohickey device and takes it for a walk.

      You end up in a car accident. In order to prove that the accident was not your fault you need to be able to find the witnesses again. You press your doohickey, and hope for the best.

      A large company pays owners of shops for the right to place a doohickey device in their shop. In return the owners can buy valuable data material about the behavior customers in

  • This reminds me of some of the esoteric social interaction stuff that was being done in MS Research when I worked there as a contractor. Does anybody need a little gizmo to change color when they keep running into the same people at a convention? Or is this a big steaming pile of grant fodder? Maybe I'm missing the point, but maybe not.
  • This device needs to store _a_lot_ of info about other's people devices, making a real time nightmare to manage. Imagine an underground train at rush hour, you cross hundreds of people. First, is it going to store all of them? Second, if this is wireless, what kind of bandwidth do you need to send all that info at the same time?
    I guess that the storage of the data is the biggest issue. How long will it store it for? a week? a month?
    Judging for my daily life, I don't see how this device would ever be dark.
    • Um, if you RTFM, you would know that the devices only broadcast an unique identifer, nothing else. Thus, it doesn't need to score that much information at all.

      Of course, if they're only broadcasting the unique identifer, I'd imagine it won't take that much bandwidth at all.

  • Guy Debord... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by br00tus ( 528477 ) on Saturday May 15, 2004 @04:35AM (#9160159)
    ...is rolling in his fucking grave.

    The Situationists made the powers-that-be so nervous, that when they helped catalyze the revolt in 1968 that had virtually every blue collar worker in France on strike, it was the French Communist Party that ultimately had to put it down.

    You can be sure Debord would put a gun to his head before doing R&D for the Intel [faceintel.com] corporation. In his last book, he said he feared the spectacle would try to integrate [amazon.com] even his ideas in some borg-like fashion, and thus he had to be even more cryptic than he already was. It seems his fears have come true. Paulos is spectacular all the way.

  • Let's see.. we live in our homes.. (/home/).

    And then go out to walk on street... (mv /tmp)

    We see but don't interact with others (ronly access files in /tmp).

    We notice familiar strangers (those 'always there' files in /tmp).

    An 'event' has to happen to convert one of those strangers (ronly files) to someone knew (changing permissions).

    See.. we live in /tmp! :)

    What's in a sig?

  • Phew! (Score:3, Funny)

    by holizz ( 737615 ) on Saturday May 15, 2004 @06:50AM (#9160376) Homepage
    I thought for a second these wearable devices would be telling their wearers to shock people to death. But apparently it was based on another of Milgram's ideas.

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't panic.

Close