Physical Computing | week 2 | Soldering and electronics Lab
Physical Computing | week 3 | Digital input & output Lab
Physical Computing | week 3 | Analog input & output Lab
Physical Computing | week 2 | Servomotor control Lab
//*
//* It is ten o’clock at the night, and I am doing a list of the 10 interactive “objects -environments” that I came across today.
01. Mobile Alarm Clock
02. Refrigerator
03. “411” Telephone Service
04. Traffic Light
05. Elevator
06. Metrocard
07. ATM – Cash Machine
08. Storefront with a Real Time Video Installation
09. Laptop Computer
10. Book
But in this list there is not a real explanation of the interactive nature. And that is why, all of the above examples are characterized by just one communication between sender and receiver. This makes all of the above from “every day” interactions, to actions, or in better words reactions.
This can very easily be understood, if we think that interactive is not when the alarm clock in our mobiles rings. Because this is a decision that we made, since we know what time we want to wake up, and we set the alarm on that time.
Interaction has a lot of to do with the communication between sender and receiver. And this happened via the “illusionary” interaction between input and output in programming. Because, when we are designing an interactive environment, or object, we set some parameters by using a vocabulary of “if”, “else”, “else if”, “and”, “or”, “then”, etc. This vocabulary creates a matrix of possibilities, which give as the illusion of interaction, by extending the possibilities.
But on the other hand, again with the example of the alarm clock, if we could manage and design something that could understand the change of the sunlight, or how many hours we are sleeping (by the position of our body), and then start ringing… then, that is an interaction for me. Because it involves possibilities that are out of human control and this creates infinite and unexpected possible results – outputs. *//
