The first week at UID
The lecture: My personal stance on Interaction Design
I was really inspired by the philosophy behind the core values we have and actions we take based on those in different situations.
Monday September 4
The interview task
We were a group of four (Toby, Geert, Ivan, Me). we interviewed each other starting at a point and snowballing questions to one another. The coherence of the conversation was maintained throughout. I was intrigued by the Ivan’s inclination towards opportunity technology yet being speculative about the data and AI. Lets call it postmodern capitalism. The people who control your data in turn control your behaviour. Geert was pretty excited about the modularity of products and opportunities in democratizing design. Whereas toby had different standpoint on social and political impacts of design. For instance, the whole 2016 election, Brexit, equality and norms of progressive london.
It was interesting to see — how place we live and work we do shapes our entire philosophy towards a certain subject.
I focused mostly on the socio-economic side of products and how as a global citizen we should focus on holistic solutions beyond boundaries of nations.
But I was really confused about the change on context or meaning of an object as we change culture. Further, should I be future facing designer or a problem solver? Ivan pointed me out that we can use the future facing technology to help and solve problems of developing countries. I was left with a modified version of my own personal reflection on design and my stance on it
Wednesday September 6
Design togetherness presentation:
The objective was to learn the design togetherness and understand what it means to work in a multidisciplinary group.
We were a group of four student — Carolyn (Landscape architecture), Geert and Selvi (Product design), Me (Science). We read three papers — Materiality/context of doing design together, Democracy in doing design together, and Design togetherness
and presented in front of the class.
-How playful we become when we work together.
-Some people fall in love with an idea and they want it to be presented. So you have to come up with ways to synthesize it in the context.
- Generally, Designers don’t like to read much. So certain amount of imagination sneaks in. The data points added with a pinch of imagination creates stories that are sometimes far from what an academic paper says
-I had a hard time explaining my idea but pictures worked well
- Unlike science or engineering, I found less amount of questions but more constructive inspiration or ideas to build upon
I acted as a initiator and stated explicitly all the points on the paper and opened it up for the discussion. We started synthesizing the points we had and gradually coming up with connections. Interestingly, we could feel what an “analysis paralysis” was and how do we use the “materiality” to augment our thinking process. With a shared objects we could interact with the same environment and work together. If something didn’t work we could always iterate.
At the end of the presentation Monica Lindh-Carlsson commented pointing at our physical presentation board: This is what materiality looks like. It’s not about the fancy sticky notes but the messiness of materials.
Friday September 8
Presentation on personal stance
I created a poster and combined my ideas from my personal diary and the things I learned during the process.
If I ask a question what it means to be a human. And what are the things that surrounds me. I divided my external and internal world (Though I sometimes think they coexist). External factors such as society, culture, economy, and technology etc. and internal factors such as memory, experience, relations, and intelligence. Once we start thinking about them we realize that they are already interacting with us. Involuntarily like our lungs breath or heart pumps.
This is what I call as an outside in interaction with human.
I place myself at the center of this interaction convergence. And try to be conscious of everything all at once.(of course, not sitting with bunch of sticky notes or a computer screen) I think of myself as a human who can diverge out an inside out interaction by solving problems (tangible or intangible), being a playful artist and tinkerer and facilitating evolution through tools and humans. Its interesting to see how this inside out interaction would complete the loop to where we began. Like a product we interact, in turn interact with us. Tools we design will inturn design us. For instance, someone builds uber it changes car sale economy(no one wants to buy a car now). someone builds airbnb it changes people’s point of view towards living in a strangers place or say, affects share economy of hotels. some builds a smartphone it changes society and the way they behave.
I don’t know how would I achieve it. Probably, I don’t know where I’m heading but I am sure it will be good.