Mark Weiser on Ubicomp

Finishing of the year with some quick Mark Weiser re-readings including Some Computer Science Issues in Ubiquitous Computing, The World is Not A Desktop and Creating the Invisible Interface (Invited Talk). I stumbled on his definition of phase I of ubicomp (phase in which we are very much still in). I should definitively use it to describe that we have not achieved invisibility yet, because technology fails us (and maybe will always do) due to physical, economical, or psychological constraints and limitations. Then he mentions the merit of bits/sec/meter3 that should be used in wireless networking. I might want to try to use it to describe connectivity in my experiments.:

Definition of ubiquitous computing

Ubiquitous computing is the method of enhancing computer use by making many computer available throughout the physical environment, but making them effectively invisible to the user.

Phase I

Phase I of ubiquitous computing: to construct, deploy, and learn from a computing environment consisting of tabs, pads, and borads. This is only phase I, because it is unlikely to achieve optimal invisibility. (Later phases are yet to be determined). [...] As we start to put tabs, pads, and boards into use, phase I of ubiquitous computing should enter its most productive period. With this substrate in place we can make much more progress both in evaluating our technologies and in choosing our next steps.

Invisibility

A good tool is an invisible tool. By invisible, I man that the tool does not introde on the consciousness; you focus on the task, not the tool. Eyeglasses are the good tool – you look at the world, not the eyeglasses. Good tools enhance invisibility. Unfortunately, our common metaphos for computer interaction lead us away from the invisible tool, and towards making the tool the center of attention.

Work life and unexamined technological skills

Anthropological studies of work life [Suchman 1985, Lave 1991] teach us that people primarily work in a world of shared situations and unexamined technological skills.

Humanities exposing the invisible

To understand invisibility the humanities and social sciences are especially valuable, because they specialize in exposing the otherwise invisible.

The childhood metaphor

Our computer should be like our childhood – an invisible foundation that is quickly forgotten but always with us, and effortlessly used throughout our lives.

Intelligent Agents

A computer that I must talk to, give commands to, or have a relationship with, is a computer that is too much the center of attention. [...] Ubiquitous computing is exploring quite different ground from Personal Digital Assistants, or the idea that computers should be autonomous agents that take on our goals. The difference can be characterized as follows. Suppose you want to lift a heavy object. You can call in your strong assistant to lift it for you, or you can be yourself made effortlessly, unconsciously, stronger and just lift it. There are times when both are good. Much of the past and current effort for better computers has been aimed at the former; ubiquitous computing aims at the latter.

Virtual Reality

VR is extremely useful in scientific visualization and entertainment, and will be very significant for those niches. But as a tool for productively changing everyone’s relationship to computation, it has two crucial flaws: first, at the present time (1992), and probably for decades, it cannot produce a simulation of significant verisimilitude at reasonable cost (today, at any cost). This means that users will not be fooled and the computer will not be out of the way. Second, and most importantly, it has the goal of fooling the user — of leaving the everyday physical world behind. This is at odds with the goal of better integrating the computer into human activities, since humans are of and in the everyday world.

3 sizes of physical affordances

The physical affordances in the world come in all sizes and shapes; for practical reasons our ubiquitous computing work begins with just three different sizes of devices: enough to give some scope, not enough to deter progress. The first size is the wall-sized interactive surface, analogous to the office whiteboard or the home magnet-covered refrigerator or bulletin board. The second size is the notepad, envisioned not as a personal computer but as analogous to scrap paper to be grabbed and used easily, with many in use by a person at once. The cluttered office desk or messy front hall table are real-life examples. Finally, the third size is the tiny computer, analogous to tiny individual notes or PostIts, and also like the tiny little displays of words found on book spines, lightswitches, and hallways.

bits/sec/meter3

Most wireless work uses a figure of merit of bits/sec x range, and seeks to increase this product. We believe that a better figure of merit is bits/sec/meter3. This figure of merit causes the optimization of total bandwidth throughout a three-dimensional space, leading to design points of very tiny cellular systems.

Hidden terminal problem

A “media access” protocol provides access to a physical medium. Common media access methods in wired domains are collision detection and token-passing. These do not work unchanged in a wireless domain because not every device is assured of being able to hear every other device (this is called the “hidden terminal” problem).