Ubiquitous computing is roughly the opposite of virtual reality. Where virtual reality puts people inside a computer-generated world, ubiquitous computing forces the computer to live out here in the world with people. Virtual reality is primarily a horse-power problem; ubiquitous computing is a very difficult integration of human factors, computer science, engineering, and social sciences. Here is how Mark Wieser (broadly recognised daddy of the term ubiq comp) describes it:
Inspired by the social scientists, philosophers, and anthropologists at PARC, we have been trying to take a radical look at what computing and networking ought to be like. We believe that people live through their practices and tacit knowledge so that the most powerful things are those that are effectively invisible in use. This is a challenge that affects all of computer science. Our preliminary approach: Activate the world. Provide hundreds of wireless computing devices per person per office, of all scales (from 1" displays to wall sized). This has required new work in operating systems, user interfaces, networks, wireless, displays, and many other areas. We call our work "ubiquitous computing". This is different from PDA's, dynabooks, or information at your fingertips. It is invisible, everywhere computing that does not live on a personal device of any sort, but is in the woodwork everywhere.
For thirty years most interface design, and most computer design, has been headed down the path of the "dramatic" machine. Its highest ideal is to make a computer so exciting, so wonderful, so interesting, that we never want to be without it. A less-traveled path I call the "invisible"; its highest ideal is to make a computer so imbedded, so fitting, so natural, that we use it without even thinking about it. (I have also called this notion "Ubiquitous Computing", and have placed its origins in post-modernism.) I believe that in the next twenty years the second path will come to dominate. But this will not be easy; very little of our current systems infrastructure will survive. We have been building versions of the infrastructure-to-come at PARC for the past four years, in the form of inch-, foot-, and yard-sized computers we call Tabs, Pads, and Boards. Our prototypes have sometimes succeeded, but more often failed to be invisible. From what we have learned, we are now exploring some new directions for ubicomp, including the famous "dangling string" display.
Rather staggeringly he began circulating this in 1988 from his work at Xerox Computer Science Lab. Consider this in tandem with the Manifesto of Futurism written in 1909:
-
We intend to sing the love of danger, the habit of energy and fearlessness.
-
Courage, audacity, and revolt will be essential elements of our poetry.
-
Up to now literature has exalted a pensive immobility, ecstasy, and sleep. We intend to
exalt aggresive action, a feverish insomnia, the racer’s stride, the mortal leap,
the punch and the slap.
-
We affirm that the world’s magnificence has been enriched by a new beauty: the
beauty of speed. A racing car whose hood is adorned with great pipes, like serpents of
explosive breath—a roaring car that seems to ride on grapeshot is more beautiful
than the
Victory of Samothrace.
-
We want to hymn the man at the wheel, who hurls the lance of his spirit across the
Earth, along the circle of its orbit.
-
The poet must spend himself with ardor, splendor, and generosity, to swell the
enthusiastic fervor of the primordial elements.
-
Except in struggle, there is no more beauty. No work without an aggressive character can
be a masterpiece. Poetry must be conceived as a violent attack on unknown forces, to
reduce and prostrate them before man.
-
We stand on the last promontory of the centuries!... Why should we look back, when what
we want is to break down the mysterious doors of the Impossible? Time and Space died
yesterday. We already live in the absolute, because we have created eternal, omnipresent
speed.
-
We will glorify war—the world’s only hygiene—militarism, patriotism,
the destructive gesture of freedom-bringers, beautiful ideas worth dying for, and scorn
for woman.
-
We will destroy the museums, libraries, academies of every kind, will fight moralism,
feminism, every opportunistic or utilitarian cowardice.
- We will sing of great crowds excited by work, by pleasure, and by riot; we will sing of the multicolored, polyphonic tides of revolution in the modern capitals; we will sing of the vibrant nightly fervor of arsenals and shipyards blazing with violent electric moons; greedy railway stations that devour smoke-plumed serpents; factories hung on clouds by the crooked lines of their smoke; bridges that stride the rivers like giant gymnasts, flashing in the sun with a glitter of knives; adventurous steamers that sniff the horizon; deep-chested locomotives whose wheels paw the tracks like the hooves of enormous steel horses bridled by tubing; and the sleek flight of planes whose propellers chatter in the wind like banners and seem to cheer like an enthusiastic crowd.
I put this in full because I'd never read it before, and hadn't even heard of it before I started thinking about Eric's paper (to find out who Eric is you'll need to keep reading). What does this mean for us today- apart from the 'scorn for woman' bit? What are the implications of ubiquitous computing for new practices of living, creating and enabling new ways of communicating? Recession fuelled anxiety tempts us, almost as if by reflex to retreat into function and the safety of furrows already ploughed and proved. The opportunity really exists for change. The time demands boldness not timidity. Invention based on optimism, curiosity and the desire to surmount economic issues by striving for individual satisfaction through utility. This is already a very quote heavy post so I'll link to this: Eric Paolo's Manifesto of Open Disruption and Participation. Spend the time. Read it. Re-read it. Share it.
Comments