Category: 05-CriticalInterface

9. Can we make the invisible visible? The more present interfaces are in our lives, the less we perceive them.

Don’t use emoticons: just send oral-spoken messages to say you hate it! “I’m blind cos I see images”

Use your smartphone with your toe

What stood out to me about this proposition is how true it is especially considering what we would consider an interface. All of my household appliances include an interface regardless if its the smart washing machine or the toaster oven. Each of the devices contain a means of facilitating human and machine interaction; however, considering how ordinary and common these objects are they normally wouldn’t be considered to have an interface. Additionally, the idea of emoticons as interfaces also stood out to me as they are a means of enabling better human conversation via text. This made me think of texting etiquette as whole such as capitalization and punctuation as means of interface. However, instead of being decided upon by a designer, this form of interface was developed organically over time.

2 – Interfaz es un verbo (I interface, you interface…). La interfaz ocurre, es acción. (Translation: Interface is a verb. The interface happens, it is action.)

• 1 – Be aware that as a verb, ‘interface’ affects the substantive and the space and time (1-cA)
• 3 – Change the keyboard settings to one that doesn’t match the images printed on your keys. Once you get used to it, change again. (1+cH)

Interfaces and interactions exist together, and the moment interactions happen the interface would for sure apply changes (whether momentary or accumulative) to the surrounding space and people who are using it. The 3rd quote reminds me of a work about reinterpreting screen interaction gestures. The artist created a daily exercise based on the common interaction movements we would do with our smartphones (e.g. swiping, tapping, pinching…). The current existing interfaces for products are mainly made for users to adapt to them, the idea of adapting and changing the interface suggests an active relationship with the interface itself. It also suggests that instead of following the default there might be new insights when we alter the preset interface. 

• Try to talk with a plant. You need something to help to translate. But the plant will keep on growing without your voice, Do not pay attention to those who stand for speaking to the plants. (1-cP)

I really liked this sentence, pertly because of the strange grammar and partly because I think it says a lot about the importance of the individual when it comes to interaction with art and the interface.

Like a plant, interactive art can live and grow and exist without the use of a human being, and sometimes the impact of human interaction on a piece is simply what the human gains from it, but it can have no effect on the actual piece itself. When creating interactive interfaces it is important to consider and rethink what our interactions actually mean and how they exist in relationnickname-CriticalInterface  to the people who use it.

8. The ideology of the interface is always embedded in the interface itself, but it is not always visible.

• Try to meet the programmers of your software, and ask them to explain their decisions to you.
• Try from time to time to open your windows in command-line mode

I recently watched the Netflix documentary “The Social Dilemma” and since I still haven’t recovered from it, I thought I would be relevant to tenet 8 (plus I need to talk about it with people and there’s a lot to unpack). “The Social Dilemma” explores the forces behind social media by bringing together people from the tech industry and asking them about problems in the industry. The general response is that initially, programmers didn’t care about the ethics. It was all about finding the best algorithm that would increase growth and maintain engagement. When I think about social media, I definitely think about how easy it is to fall into a youtube hole or scroll on tiktok for hours. However, even though I need to develop better self control, “The Social Dilemma” revealed that the software engineers and psychologists of these massive tech companies specifically target gaps in the human psyche as a way of encouraging addiction. And on top of that, our data is packaged into gigantic super computers and sold to even bigger corporations (Capitalism  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯).  Instagram, for example, is a feed that will show you pictures of your friends and advertisements. We don’t have any control on what order the feed is or how frequent the ads are, but isn’t it super creepy when you google toothpaste and the next ad you get on Instagram is about Colgate? My personal hypothesis is instagram’s ideology is to sell as much stuff as possible, so it’s interface is designed to advertise things it predicts you want. It’s capitalist genius because it works so well but it’s concerning how some people still think instagram is harmless.

“3. The interface exists in the crease between space and time; it is a device and simultaneously a situation. It is rendered (updated under thoughtful conditions) and emergent (joining into something new).

• Try to delay your interaction with the interface by counting to 10 before clicking. Count to 100. Wait an hour, a day. (1+cH)

• Invite yourself to act and perform in a different way. Imagine a different gender, age, location, character, social position for 20 minutes every day. Review how the render changes. (1+cH)

• Read a book before your next internet connection. The first thing you do when you connect, is to report on what you read. (1+cH)”

---

I was intrigued by this tenet, as it beautifully contextualizes where interactions take place: “the crease between space and time.” The proposals challenge the reader to be more thoughtful in interacting with an interface, by slowing down time, changing your persona, or changing the course of events within the interaction. It begs the reader to recognize how meaningful interactions can elicit new reactions from even the most mundane interface you’ve always interacted with. I like the vision they project, as interfaces that make you think far outweigh those that only consume. Realistically though, I wonder how plausible it is to encourage such active engagement from a design standpoint, in an age when passive consumption has become a norm and is grossly preferred.

Favorite tenent:

“The interface collects traces: traces and remains of all agents/agencies which converge in it.”

In the examples I read, it discussed ways to avoid being tracked or checked by programs. This is literally what CIA, Facebook, virtually any top tier CS company does: They make money off of our traces. The ways to avoid this were mitigatory. There was no way to completely erase one’s self from an interface. This happens with or without my consent and I can’t take it back. This tenant isn’t even embedded into just interfaces. It is inherent to the internet itself. Internet Protocol guarantees what I do on this domain is public knowledge and recorded.

“10. The interface uses metaphors that create illusions: I am free, I can go back, I have unlimited memory, I am anonymous, I am popular, I am creative, it’s free, it’s neutral, it is simple, it is universal. Beware of illusions!

Did you know that the first photographic camera, the first washing machine, the first transistor radio, the first Mac and the first windows had the same slogan? “YOU JUST CLICK, WE DO THE REST”.

Don’t delete your bookmarks history after watching porn. It’s useless, Google always remembers.”

This proposition interested me because it reminded me of something I read from a CS textbook about “abstractions” in computer systems. For example, thinking that a single CPU can run multiple programs at once is an abstraction – in reality, the processor switches among the programs. This proposition also interests me because the interface gives us the illusion that using technology is safe and that we have privacy and control over our digital footprint/identity. Like mentioned in one of the propositions, internet history is an abstraction that makes us think that we have control over the information collected on how we access the internet (same with incognito). General lack of knowledge about illusions is detrimental, but most interfaces do not try to make its users more aware of these illusions. For example, the illusion of safety makes some people think that bringing your phone to a protest, taking photos of others at a protest and posting those photos is safe.

10. The interface uses metaphors that create illusions: I am free, I can go back, I have unlimited memory, I am anonymous, I am popular, I am creative, it’s free, it’s neutral, it is simple, it is universal. Beware of illusions!

Did you know that the first photographic camera, the first washing machine, the first transistor radio, the first Mac and the first windows had the same slogan? “YOU JUST CLICK, WE DO THE REST”

Imagine your desktop is a kitchen, a garden, a hospital, a computer. Now, imagine it using no metaphor

This tenet and the propositions talks about the critical role our imagination plays in the interface. I found the second quote, which is one of the propositions listed under this tenet, particularly interesting because it means that many of the new technologies/tools were introduced/advertised in such way that the advertisement exploits people’s imaginations and thus makes its item more interesting and valuable. I think people’s ability to imagine is boundless — the more you gain knowledge, the more you could imagine based on all the information your brain has collected.

I remember reading about what distinguishes human from other species, of which the main takeaway was that human has the ability to imagine and believe in fiction, while other species don’t. For example, we enjoy dramas, movies, musical, play, literature, etc. in our everyday life, and these are all possible because humans have the ability to pretend and collectively believe in something that’s not there. All the characters and events in the fiction don’t exist or didn’t happen anywhere around the world (usually), yet everyone still enjoys knowing that everything is made up.

Similarly, the concept of money and currency totally relies on the ability to imagine, as what we call money is either a piece of paper/metal or some number presented on the computer system.

 (To) interface is a verb (I interface, you interface ...). The interface occurs, is action.

-Be gentle with your keyboard, after 70 years typewriting your fingers will appreciate it. 

-Change the keyboard settings to one that doesn't match the images printed on your keys. Once you get used to it, change again. 

-Do not click today.

 I find this to be most interesting because it fundamentally challenges my understanding of an interface. I have always thought of "interface" as something on FIGMA that the design team passes on to the front-end team to implement. It's something that's for sure comes to life from static pixels to interactive components of a live app, but I've never thought of the word as a verb. The level of familiarity that I have with having interfaces in every moment, every angle of my life, has made me forget that the word "interface" is not just a noun before "interface designer", it's what I interact with and what I need as I am typing down this particular letter. These are all interfaces, but I've forgot about their existence because of how they are well integrated in me.

 

Tenet 9. Can we make the invisible visible? The more present interfaces are in our lives, the less we perceive them.

• Don’t use emoticons: just send oral-spoken messages to say you hate it! “I’m blind cos I see images” (Mahmud Shabistari) (1>)(P)(W)(+c)
• How many times do you remember you’re shifting gears when driving? Speak the gear number loud every time you do it.(P)(1)(-c)
• Use your smartphone with your toe (or your tongue) https://vimeo.com/104791815 (A)(+c)(1>)

I found this tenet interesting because the pervasiveness of interfaces. Often times great video editing goes unnoticed because it allows the view to be engrossed in the video. By contrast, glaring discontinuities (bad jumpcuts, etc) are very easily noticed. I think interfaces are similarly invisible, and only really noticeable when you look for it. Something as simple as the way someone organizes their files or their IDE preferences are all invisible to us, till we go to someone else's computer. I think this tenet is interesting because it considers interfaces which are so universal, such as gear shifts.

Some other examples of invisible interfaces include literal interactions like Bluetooth and forks and knives and writing utensils. Other examples that support this tenet include checking out at a grocery store. While the latter example may be evolving due to COVID and self-checkout, the idea of a conveyor belt to move groceries four feet forward often goes unnoticed.