|
|
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
- | This Wiki is currently used to support the discussion and planning for a [[CHI 2013 Visions and Visioning SIG|CHI 2013 Special Interest Group Meeting on Visions and Visioning in CHI]]. If there is sufficent interest and up take it may move beyond simply visions for human computer interaction and into broader visions for computing.
| + | [[CHI 2013 SIG Meeting]] |
- | | + | |
- | [http://t.co/HOCpAKja See our CHI SIG 2013 video]
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | == Introduction ==
| + | |
- | There are many visions that touch on the future of
| + | |
- | human computer interaction from a [[trans-human future]]
| + | |
- | to a [[post-technological UI]]. However visions related to
| + | |
- | the progress of technology are not new. Creative and
| + | |
- | insightful visionaries from [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/john_murphy/denisdiderot.html Denis Diderot] to [http://web.mit.edu/invent/iow/bush.html Vannevar Bush] have been postulating visions of possible futures
| + | |
- | or technology for centuries. Some idealised views end
| + | |
- | up discredited with advances in knowledge, while
| + | |
- | others now appear remarkably prescient.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | == Our Question ==
| + | |
- | The question is, do visions and the process of creating them have a place in CHI, or are they simply flights of fancy? Details of this CHI 2013 SIG's [[CHI 2013 Visions and Visioning SIG | Objectives, Organisation, and Audience]] details can be found on the [[CHI 2013 Visions and Visioning SIG]] page.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | == Context ==
| + | |
- | This SIG meeting provides a forum for visionaries;
| + | |
- | researchers and practitioners looking to consider the
| + | |
- | place and importance of visions within CHI. Can visions,
| + | |
- | the process of visioning and forming new visions help
| + | |
- | us refine, advance or develop new research or forms of
| + | |
- | interaction. And if visions are important to us, then are
| + | |
- | they part of the regular academic process? If so, should
| + | |
- | CHI provide venues for publishing new visions?
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | This SIG aims to reflect on CHI’s stance
| + | |
- | towards visions as a means to advance research in
| + | |
- | human computer interaction. Are visions part of the
| + | |
- | regular academic process and should they be embraced
| + | |
- | in CHI as in the UbiComp conference? This SIG seeks to
| + | |
- | form a community of interest around reflecting on
| + | |
- | visions, the visioning process and considering if visions
| + | |
- | have a place beyond post-hoc justification of research.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | This SIG aims at discussing the role of visions in CHI
| + | |
- | research and what role visions should have at the CHI
| + | |
- | conference. Committees do not create new visions nor
| + | |
- | do participants in a 90-minute SIG. Instead the goal
| + | |
- | here is to understand the place of visions and how they
| + | |
- | can aid in furthering research, development and indeed
| + | |
- | changing our perceptions of what CHI might be.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | == Background ==
| + | |
- | Can visions such as a [[trans-human future]] or the [[post-technological UI]] act as "an incentive for scientists" as Vannevar Bush said or function as a focal point for new communities?
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | Visions allow us to consider what our preferred future
| + | |
- | for computing and interaction might be. Even before
| + | |
- | computing was conceived, visionary thinkers in art,
| + | |
- | science, the popular press and science fiction presented
| + | |
- | visions of a world underpinned by computing.
| + | |
- | Visions are typically not grounded in the problems or
| + | |
- | limitations of today’s computing environments. Instead,
| + | |
- | they provide us with a long-term view focused on a
| + | |
- | possible future. Published in papers, books, videos or
| + | |
- | other media visions can afford us a source of
| + | |
- | inspiration, the ability to spark the imagination and
| + | |
- | help communicate the thoughts and aspirations of
| + | |
- | many. Visions have successfully helped create
| + | |
- | communities of interest; where entire communities and
| + | |
- | conferences have been established based on visions.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | There are many established visions we can draw on from [[Techno-dependency]], [[Hyper-Connectivity]], [[Ubiquitous Computing]] to [[Radical Atoms]]. Existing
| + | |
- | visions range from being ones which are explicitly defined,
| + | |
- | technologically defined by example, defined by interaction,
| + | |
- | implicitly defined or emerge naturally as a concept.
| + | |
- | Emergent visions such as the [[Paperless Office]] have
| + | |
- | formed through the popular press, only later to be
| + | |
- | questioned as myth by researchers. Visions based on
| + | |
- | technological examples have emerged from research or
| + | |
- | concepts such as the [[Phone Slave]] or [[Knowledge Navigator]] and offer a view of interaction that can
| + | |
- | inspire others to see them as visions. Visions based on
| + | |
- | views of interaction include [[Embodied Interaction]] and
| + | |
- | [[Instrumental interaction]]. Implicit visions emerge
| + | |
- | related to specific technologies such as [[Brain Computer Interfaces]] or [[VR]] and to concepts such as the [[Singularity]]
| + | |
- | , [[Internet of Things]] or [[Ambient Intelligence]].
| + | |
- | Some visions present a more definitive view of how they
| + | |
- | would like to see the world and examples of such include
| + | |
- | [[Ubiquitous Computing]] (vanishing computer, embodied
| + | |
- | virtuality, context, pads, multi-display environments)
| + | |
- | , [[Memex]] (“WWW concepts”, brain computer
| + | |
- | interfaces, new forms of encyclopedia, speech recognition,
| + | |
- | association indexing), [[Tangible User Interfaces]],
| + | |
- | [[Augmenting Human Intellect]] and [[Radical Atoms]]
| + | |
- | (dynamic materials, shape-memory clay) [6].
| + | |
- | Not all visions have come about from a single author or
| + | |
- | even a clearly defined vision statement. Some have
| + | |
- | caught the imagination or aligned naturally with emerging
| + | |
- | communities while others have languished in obscurity.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | == Use of Visions ==
| + | |
- | For CHI what use are visions in practical terms?
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | Visions are “immortal thoughts” which endure, fly and
| + | |
- | inspire “precisely in proportion to the depth of mind
| + | |
- | from which it issued, so high does it soar, so long does
| + | |
- | it sing.” said Emmerson. Visions have traits, problems, and
| + | |
- | functions and can be considered of different categories.
| + | |
- | Traits common to all visions are an aspirational future,
| + | |
- | san idealized past and a recognition that the technology
| + | |
- | or use of technology today is poor. Some visions are
| + | |
- | framed so far into the future that they often appear to
| + | |
- | the reader as science fiction or magic rather than a
| + | |
- | concept that can inspire or motivate research now.
| + | |
- | Other visions are much closer to our current world as
| + | |
- | they draw on established or expected developments in
| + | |
- | scenarios. As such, this category of vision is often
| + | |
- | easier to understand and embrace. In either category
| + | |
- | visions can function to communicate ideas, inspire or
| + | |
- | energise research, point out gaps in current technology,
| + | |
- | aid in community formation, act as a bridge to other
| + | |
- | fields and even improve funding. Visions do have
| + | |
- | problems, for example either being too radical or more
| + | |
- | often describing a perfect and hence unrealistic world.
| + | |
- | Despite these potential problems, visions have proven
| + | |
- | to have the power of shaping communities in Human-
| + | |
- | Computer-Interaction and guiding research efforts over
| + | |
- | many years, or even many decades.
| + | |
- | Consider for example Vannevar Bush’s vision of [[Memex]]
| + | |
- | that was published in 1945. This has inspired several
| + | |
- | generations of researchers working on hypertext
| + | |
- | interfaces – most remarkably this holds true even
| + | |
- | though Bush foresaw fundamentally different, analog
| + | |
- | technology as the basis of hypertext than the digital
| + | |
- | technology employed by [[Engelbart]] and his successors.
| + | |
- | The vision of [[Ubiquitous Computing]] (UbiComp), was
| + | |
- | developed at Xerox PARC at the beginning of the
| + | |
- | 1990s. It defined their research for years, led to the
| + | |
- | creation of conferences and is still very influential on
| + | |
- | current HCI research and thinking even after 20 years.
| + | |
- | The emergent vision of the Paperless Office helped
| + | |
- | frame the thinking Xerox put into the development of
| + | |
- | PARC. While other authors presented this vision as a
| + | |
- | myth, it remains as a vision or counter-vision.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | For more details, we refer to Reeves’ recent paper,
| + | |
- | which provides a thorough analysis of various roles that
| + | |
- | visions and envisioning can play.
| + | |
- | | + | |
- | | + | |
- | [[Old Main Page]]
| + | |