Told you so, everyone who has tried to convince me that our elevators’ door-close buttons did anything
✖ Via Marco Arment’s reaction to Nick Paumgarten’s recent piece he wrote for The New Yorker about elevators.

Arment, as do so many others, really wants to believe that the door-close button does nothing in an elevator. There are stories going around about this: door-close buttons aren’t really working in elevators, they are just there so you can feel like you’re in control. For his article, Paumgarten may have got some information about this from Otis representative:

In most elevators, at least in any built or installed since the early nineties, the door-close button doesn’t work. It is there mainly to make you think it works. (It does work if, say, a fireman needs to take control. But you need a key, and a fire, to do that.) Once you know this, it can be illuminating to watch people compulsively press the door-close button. That the door eventually closes reinforces their belief in the button’s power. It’s a little like prayer. (more)

But there’s no specific references in his article : who did confirm this to him? Is it true about all elevators? All brands? Everywhere? Can an elevator be configured one way while another elevator, identical in brand and model, be configured another way? There’s no hard fact about this in the article. Nothing to prove that all door-close buttons are fake. And nothing to disprove it.

And that’s why Arment reaction is so interesting. He doesn’t know for a fact if the door-close button work or not in a given elevator. But he wants to feel in control : he doesn’t want to be controlled by an elevator’s fake button (eh, come on, nobody’s that stupid : we’re not monkeys, right?). So he will likely dismissed any piece of information telling him the very opposite of what he wants to believe. Just like those who believe in the door-close button will dismiss any delay in the closing of the door as being a sign that they did not controlled its action. Arment, though, will be very interested in information (Paumgarten’s article for example) that reinforce his belief. Just like the door-close button believers will consider any closing door as being an empirical proof of the control they can have on the elevator.

And thus, those who think the door-close button is just a fake are not smarter than those who think the door-close button works. It’s just two different ways to cope with a lack of adequate information, a certain degree of uncertainty : without hard facts about this issue, we’re all but believers trying to stay in control in front of an ambiguous situation.

[Update : July 17th, 2010] The same argument goes for Slavoj Zizek:

Zizek loves to correct viewpoints when precisely the opposite is considered correct. He calls this counterintuitive observation. His favorite thought form is the paradox. Using his psychoanalytical skills, he attempts to demonstrate how liberal democracy manipulates people. One of his famous everyday observations on this subject relates to the buttons used to close the door in elevators. He has discovered that they are placebos. The doors don’t close a second faster when one presses the button, but they don’t have to. It’s sufficient that the person pressing the button has the illusion that he is able to influence something. The political illusion machine that calls itself Western democracy functions in exactly the same way, says Zizek. (Spiegel Online: “Welcome to the Slavoj Zizek Show” by Philipp Oehmke, July 8th, 2010)


• Jun 27, 2010 link notes reblogged from marco  [via] tagged: communication  technology  elevator  interface  machine  control  computer  intelligence  uncertainty  anxiety  order  ambiguity  information  beliefs  black box  science 
technology communication experience ipad apple innovation sense interaction interface intelligence community epistemology extension meida kids  reblog
✖ Via I’m Not Actually a Geek : “Apple iPad and the Radical Innovation of Meaning” by Hutch Carpenter, Feb. 2, 2010
“OK, if iPad is innovating meaning even more than it is technology, what meaning might that be? Here’s my best guess:

iPad is tapping into an emerging dynamic of a more interactive, tactile experience with digital technology and information. These interactions make technology less of an interface, and more of an extension of ourselves and our environment.

The tweets above are a couple that show the natural way children engage with technology. Given the iPhone experience, they turn around and want to apply it to other devices. Buttons on devices, our traditional form of interaction, are divorced from the screen. They provide a measure of distance from the digital experience.

Touch, however, represents a new level of intimacy in the digital experience. In technology terms, it’s just an alternative form of interface. Touch, mouse, tab, whatever. But touch is a vital human sense, and a core part of experience. It’s how we interact with others, how we shop, experience textures and so much more.”

About Hutch Carpenter:

“I am the VP of Product for Spigit. Spigit helps companies manage innovation, providing idea management and prediction market software for enterprises. The goal is enable easy capture of ideas by employees, customers and partners, and convert the most promising to innovative initiatives. Spigit recently received a $10 million equity investment from Warburg Pincus.” (more)


• Feb 02, 2010 link notes reblogged from infoneer-pulse  [via] tagged: technology  communication  experience  iPad  Apple  innovation  sense  interaction  interface  intelligence  community  epistemology  extension  meida  kids 
technology chart brain anatomy human animal intelligence evolution
✖ Via

Scientific American, vol. 301 no 3 Sept 2009 p. 48.



• Oct 23, 2009 link notes tagged: technology  chart  brain  anatomy  human  animal  intelligence  evolution 
comic happiness intelligence chart visualization knowledge
✖ Via FlowingData: “Lisa Simpson on Happiness vs. Intelligence”

“As intelligence goes up, happiness goes down. See, I made a graph. I make lots of graphs.” (Lisa Simpson, The Simpsons, episode 257, January 7, 2001).



• Sep 08, 2009 link notes  [via] tagged: comic  happiness  intelligence  chart  visualization  knowledge 
technology communication computer machine knowledge science intelligence ai book future evolution vintage ad apple
✖ Via Knowledge Navigator (Wikipedia).

Description: “Knowledge Navigator 1987 mock-up. The device opened like a book, with the “spine” lifting the face to an easy reading angle, and acting as a carrying handle when closed. The dark circle at the top is a video camera similar to a modern webcam, the slot in the upper right holds a memory card, and the grills on either side of the screen are speakers. In one featurette, the screen is also shown acting as a scanner.”



• Aug 14, 2009 link notes tagged: technology  communication  computer  machine  knowledge  science  intelligence  AI  book  future  evolution  vintage  ad  Apple 

_What is The Singularity?_ The acceleration of technological progress has been the central feature of this century. I argue in this paper that we are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth. The precise cause of this change is the imminent creation by technology of entities with greater than human intelligence. There are several means by which science may achieve this breakthrough (and this is another reason for having confidence that the event will occur):

- The development of computers that are “awake” and superhumanly intelligent. (To date, most controversy in the area of AI relates to whether we can create human equivalence in a machine. But if the answer is “yes, we can”, then there is little doubt that beings more intelligent can be constructed shortly thereafter.

- Large computer networks (and their associated users) may “wake up” as a superhumanly intelligent entity.

- Computer/human interfaces may become so intimate that users may reasonably be considered superhumanly intelligent.

- Biological science may find ways to improve upon the natural human intellect.

The first three possibilities depend in large part on improvements in computer hardware. Progress in computer hardware has followed an amazingly steady curve in the last few decades. Based largely on this trend, I believe that the creation of greater than human intelligence will occur during the next thirty years. (Charles Platt has pointed out the AI enthusiasts have been making claims like this for the last thirty years. Just so I’m not guilty of a relative-time ambiguity, let me more specific: I’ll be surprised if this event occurs before 2005 or after 2030.)

✖ Via Vernor Vinge: “The Coming Technological Singularity: How To Survive in the Post-Human Era”

About Vernor Vinge: “Vernor Steffen Vinge (born October 2, 1944 in Waukesha, Wisconsin, U.S.) is a retired San Diego State University Professor of Mathematics, computer scientist, and science fiction author. He is best known for his Hugo Award-winning novels and novellas A Fire Upon the Deep (1992), A Deepness in the Sky (1999), Rainbows End (2006), Fast Times at Fairmont High (2002) and The Cookie Monster (2004), as well as for his 1993 essay “The Coming Technological Singularity”, in which he argues that exponential growth in technology will reach a point beyond which we cannot even speculate about the consequences.” (Wikipedia).

Read also a summary of Vinge’s thought about a future without the Singularity

.


• Aug 06, 2009 link notes  [via] tagged: communication  technology  author  future  computer  human  life  machine  singularity  intelligence  AI 
computer machine ballistic vintage intelligence technology communication
✖ Via Modern Mechanix: “Thinking Machines Are Getting Smarter” by Robert Strother, Mechanix Illustrated, Oct. 1958, p. 90

“AT THE Vanguard Computing Center - in Washington, D. C, I watched a young woman present a machine with an extremely complex problem in ballistics involving hundreds of variables. At once lights on a control panel twinkled and winked as the computer checked to see that all equipment was operating properly. Then it set briskly to work. Magnetic tapes spun in their shiny glass-and-steel vacuum cabinets, the high-speed printer muttered. Suddenly the machine stopped and the electric typewriter wrote: “Last entry improperly stated!”

A little embarrassed, the young operator corrected her error, and the machine started again. Four minutes later it gave an answer that had required several million individual calculations.

“This is a wonderful machine” the girl said, “but it makes you shiver sometimes, especially when you give it a wrong figure. Once in a while we give it an incorrect figure on purpose—just to see it sneer at us.” (Read more).



• Jul 08, 2009 link notes  [via] tagged: computer  machine  ballistic  vintage  intelligence  technology  communication 

skandalon


1 2



ARCHIVE / TUMBLTAPE / RSS / CONTACT / Theme based on D&D