As the author of Make it so explains, technology has an unattachable relationship with science fiction. I feel like back in the days, to the general public, high-tech was something that was very unfamiliar, and very few people had access to. Therefore, science fiction had to contain something that appeared to be “high-tech” for a long time, which included the jewel-like buttons and unfriendly user interface. (As a lot of people still say “beep boop” when they explain high-tech in a jokingly way). The interface had to appear very complex and unfriendly because that way the general audience will watch and think that, “Wow, Captain Kirk is amazing–how does he memorize all the roles of those buttons?”. The interfaces’ role is very big in any technology; it is like a representative that you speak to at customer services. It has to be as literal, straightforward, and user-friendly. From that perspective, anthropomorphism might seem inevitable in its existence. Because if anything for technology to appear friendly to humans, it would have human-like characteristics. However, the interesting part is that anthropomorphism actually evokes an unfriendly feeling to humans such as an uncanny valley. If people preferred something resembles that of a human being, the camera would look like an eye, or a mouse would be in the shape of a hand. Rather than anthropomorphism, what really appeals to humans that resembles one’s physique would be ergonomics. Its beauty does not come from mimicking one’s physique but rather interacts with it. On the other hand, anthropomorphism may not be an appeal in an interface, but it is in communication. A great example would be emojis. It has ambiguous human-like traits so that anyone can see themselves in those emojis and express themselves. No matter how much people try to make objects look more human, it only intensifies the uncanny valley; for humans, those objects that have direct contacts with humans are better to be ergonomic and those express humans are better to be anthropomorphic.