Title: Design of Future Things
Author: Don Norman
Publisher: Basic Books, May 2009
Summary
This second chapter discussed the psychology of people and machines. The author mentioned that humans generally use anthropomorphism to apply human attributes to machines. With changing technology, the design of such machines is evolving to become autonomous or semi-autonomous, where they can create their own assessments of situations and make their own decisions. Generally, manufacturers want users to believe and trust in the designer, not questioning the machine or how it's working.
The author looked at the design of brains, comparing humans versus machine. While machines are faster at processing, the processing is much less parallel as compared to the human brain processes. Humans tend to see relationships, patterns, and similarities between objects, and generally contain common sense, while machines do not. However, both human and machine must succumb to the same worldly demands and requirements, such as the need to function effectively, reliably, and safely in the real world. To further discuss brains, the author describes the three important levels of processing in the brain: visceral (subconscious processing determined by biological heritage), behavioral (learned skills that are mostly subconscious and control behavior), and reflective (conscious and self-aware; contains analysis of past and future dreams).
Symbiotic relationships are discussed, as in considering the car+human or horse+human to be a whole system, it becomes a conscious, emotional, intelligent system with the car being visceral, the driver reflective, and both being behavioral. However, there are some currently irreplicable capabilities of humans, such as emotions, perception, and the common ground aspect that is needed for proper communication.
Discussion
The author explained many differences and similarities of machines, emphasizing his point with examples of future systems such as a refrigerator that puts you on a diet. The examples were amusing, but I could see how once the technology caught up, someone would think this was a good idea and implement it, eventually leading to some interesting conundrums like refrigerators starving their overweight owners. I like how the author provided his own opinions about how such machines could be designed to be useful and accepted by people as a whole. His opinion was that if machines suggested instead of demanded an outcome it would be better. For example, instead of the refrigerator denying access to food, it could simply suggest not to eat it, or even make fun of the person to offer some stimulation for not eating it. In addition, better communication between humans and machines needs to be established, so that if the assumptions and common factors between the two are made clear, it should be easier to actually communicate. I agree with the author's opinion.
 |
| An ordinary, non-controlling refrigerator. Source: www.goodmanappliance.com |
No comments:
Post a Comment