[-empyre-] Glitch / HCI

Curt Cloninger curt at lab404.com
Mon Feb 3 06:21:45 EST 2014

Hi Ben (and all),

This seems related:

The difference between experimental/critical/provocative (ab)use vs. "mere" use probably matters more than the difference between non-interactive vs. interactive. So [on the weak/tactical consumer end of the spectrum] to merely reblog corporate net detritus (however ironically) probably doesn't matter all that much. Furthermore, [on the strong/strategic producer end of the spectrum] to make an even "stickier" (more usable) interactive hci interface/mousetrap probably doesn't matter all that much (and may even matter in a detrimental way).


On Jan 30, 2014, at 8:57 PM, "B. Bogart" <ben at ekran.org> wrote:

> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> I was looking at the upcoming Prix Ars application process and realized
> that there was not really a place for my (generative) work, I looked
> over at the "interactive art" section to see how broadly it was defined,
> and found this:
> "Jurors are looking forward to encountering innovative technological
> concepts blended with superbly effective design (usability)."
> This struck me because I'm just now working on a talk where I'm trying
> to articulate some of the interactions between culture, technology and
> cognition. I consider usability and "good design" as being designs that
> fit very well with existing expectations, and therefore also social
> norms. It's quite possible that such designs are just indoctrination
> machines that blindly follow the ideals of the status quo. They reflect
> the already dominant values of a culture, thus our current intuitive
> technology favours spontaneous perusal of what is current and hip.
> Consumption is just a click away in virtual "stores" (data repositories)
> suggested by algorithms and "friends" on social networks.
> They go beyond just reflection because they reinforce particular notions
> and behaviours. Somewhere in our history we decided sitting was
> something we should do, so we invented chairs. The more chairs we
> encountered the more we were inclined to sit, now many of us sit most of
> the day. In google's auto search completion
> (http://www.unwomen.org/ca/news/stories/2013/10/women-should-ads) we
> have a similar effect, where even non-misogynists click on it out of
> curiosity, thereby reinforcing the pattern.
> The nature of how quickly we learn and internalize technologies, with
> hardly any criticism or hardly awareness, leads me to think that HCI is
> really about shaping behaviour and therefore also cognition. What
> happens if we shift the role of HCI to social and cognitive engineering?
> Considering consumption and the capitalist machine, maybe it already has.
> Apologies if this is too late or already discussed, I've only been
> checking into the discussion sporadically.
> Ben Bogart
> www.ekran.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140202/e76faa7a/attachment.htm>

More information about the empyre mailing list