My ITP Blog

Response on May 19, 2008 Readings for “Sociable Objects”

“The most profound technologies are those that disappear” and even more so, the most profound are those which are not seen as technologies at all.  Writing has become an extension of human consciousness, and it is Mark Weiser’s goal that ubiquitous computing, the seamless integration of computers into every single facet of human life, be elevated to the status of writing.  He fails to mention that writing took hundreds of years to bee seen, not as a threat to memory and culture, but as an indispensable tool responsible for the advancement of human capabilities.   It is also interesting that he never addresses why ubiquitous computing should be a reality at all.  For him, it is an obvious necessity.

Since Weiser wrote “Computers for the 21^st Century” in 1991, the acceptance of ubiquitous computing, best represented by the reception of objects that can communicate, has grown tremendously.  Keeping in mind the history of philosophy and human cognition, there is still an understandable hesitance that the widespread integration of circuits into every single arena would in some way signal the death of humanism and the birth of some sort of mechahumanism.  It is true that surrendering our existence to machines would mean a new way of interacting and existing with each other and with the objects surround us, but the question of it being a dire prospect is one which remains to be answered.

What does it mean for objects to be able to talk and interpret and in some way think?  In “A World of Connections”, the collection of articles from The Economist,  we see the practical considerations of bringing uibiquitous computing to fruition.  The authors highlight the economic (integrating wireless technology is expensive) and the bureaucratic (diverse industries have to compromise and communicate) aspects which hinder the integration of wireless technology.  We learn that the technology is advancing at an unprecedented rate, but that is not enough to insure that within twenty years our toasters will be able to talk to our coffee makers.  A simple question, which never comes up in either article, is if we really want all existing objects to be able to speak amongst themselves.

Ideally, successful ubiquitous computing would be that which allows humans to communicate better and be more productive (of course, “communicate” and “productive” need clarifying as well), and I understand Weiser’s insistence that this success will only come when they become invisible, behind-the-scenes workers who live only to improve life.  The optimist’s emphasis remains on the perpetuation of the human, but the pessimist’s focus is on the opposite.

In August 2026: There Will Come Soft Rains”, Ray Bradbury presents a chilling picture of a world where mechanical/electrical/digital technologies blindly continue doing what they do despite the complete absence of the human.  Sprinklers continue to water the grass, mechanic maids do their daily cleaning and electric sensor control the temperature just as they were programmed to do.  They become a haunting reminder of good intentions and idealistic desires gone terribly wrong.  Machine remains after man has mysteriously disappeared, but it is interesting that Bradbury lets nature have the last word.  Man historic attempts to conquer nature go ultimately unrealized.

There has to be a balance between Bradbury’s apocalyptic future and Weiser’s utopia where machine does man’s bidding invisibly and obediently.

Filed under: Sociable_Objects, ITP