Category Archive: Science

Are Some People Just Visually Dull?

March 19th, 2007

stretched_screen2_660.jpg

Everywhere you go, you see 16:9 widescreen television screens playing regular 4:3 video programs stretched out to fit across the whole screen. You see these in airports, banks, bars, and offices. Maybe you even see this in your own home.

Presumably, the owners of these TV screens can’t bear to see all those extra black pixels on the left and right sides going to waste. The thought of not using those pixels — pixels that cost hundreds of dollars! — is so unbearable that the owner is willing to tolerate the fact that everyone and everything they see on the screen is literally 50% wider/fatter than they are supposed to be.

To me, the sight of such a stretched-out, distorted screen is utterly unbearable. Totally unwatchable. It might as well be upside down to me, the people look so wrong. And yet to millions of people, this is normal and acceptable. Can they not see that it looks completely wrong? I mean, honestly: Can they not tell the difference? MORE…

SXSW 2007: Class Dismissed, or How My Panel Went

March 11th, 2007

My SXSW panel, High Class and Low Class Web Design, is over now, and I can now share a little bit of about how I and a few others think it went.

Some bloggers who attended the panel have already published their own notes and reviews, too, so if you want to skip what I think and just read some outside opinions, please do so.

And if you attended the panel yourself, I’d love to hear your thoughts, both about the panel and the subject itself, in the comment area.

MORE…

More World Maps

March 6th, 2007

Just thought I’d post a couple world maps to compare with my own drawing.

First, let’s see what the big shots say over at Rand McNally:

worldmap_randmcnally.jpg

Not bad. Almost as accurate as mine.

Let’s see how I compare to the 17th century cartographer Nicolas Visscher:

worldmap_visscher.jpg

I think I kicked his ass.

Talking to Myself with SimulScribe

March 4th, 2007

vocaltract2.gif

Illustration from a 1940’s Bell Labs project investigating human speech synthesis and recognition

I recently signed up for SimulScribe, a new service which replaces your existing voicemail system with one that:

  1. Transcribes the voice message into text (using a speech-to-text (STT) engine)…
  2. wraps the voicemail message into a WAV file…
  3. and then emails the raw text and the WAV file (as an attachment) to your email address.

Setting up SimulScribe couldn’t be easier: The free trial doesn’t even require a credit card to start using right away, and they provide you with explicit and shockingly simple instructions for configuring your voicemail for your particular carrier. You can be set up with the SimulScribe service in literally under 3 minutes.

After setting it up (and this may come has a shock to those of you who still think STT is not ready for prime time), the system has performed almost flawlessly.

Below I’ll present some example transcriptions, followed by some ideas on how this technology might be extended in the future. MORE…

Aura of Inevitability (or: When a Technology’s Time has Come)

February 23rd, 2007

waiting_for_technology_410.jpg

New technology products often take us by surprise. In 1992, for example, we couldn’t possibly have dreamed of how the Internet would transform the world by 1997, only 5 years later. The best innovations are things “you never knew you wanted but cannot live without” kind, inventions that come out of nowhere. YouTube, for example. Or TiVo.

But certain other technology products are so obvious that when they finally emerge many people shrug and wonder “what took it so long?” We knew they were coming, but year after year they never actually materialized.

When they do materialize, we are overjoyed. After years of waiting, for example, we are finally getting MP3 players into cel phones.We are using wireless networks and bluetooth more and more, but we knew we wanted this stuff years ago. The technology consumer will often heap glowing praise on these kinds of new technologies as they emerge, calling them innovative and groundbreaking, when in fact the functionality of the products is merely filling a hole that everyone knew was there.

The Apple iPhone is a perfect example: while the UI is indeed remarkable, almost nothing about it is technologically innovative or new. If you asked me (or just about any of my friends) to describe the perfect cel phone feature set, it would look a lot like an iPhone. In fact, as the owner of a Windows PocketPC phone for nearly 5 years, nothing about the iPhone’s tech specs surprised me. The UI, again, is great and very innovative, but the hardware itself and the basic concept of the device is wholly old news. MORE…

The Empathy Test

September 1st, 2006

bladerunner_empathy_01.jpg

“Let me tell you about my mother…”

In the movie Blade Runner, the “Voight-Kampff Empathy Test” detects whether or not a test subject is a real human being or an android “replicant”. A machine reads the body’s physical reactions to various psychologically- provocative scenarios (“Capillary dilation of the so-called blush response? Fluctuation of the pupil. Involuntary dilation of the iris…”) and reveals whether or not the test subject’s sense of empathy is consistent with that of a real human being.

There has always been a lot of talk about “empathy” in the information architecture world. Information architects regularly describe empathy as both a critical prerequisite for the job and as something fundamental to the professional practice. But in all my years as a user experience designer and information architect, I was never taught empathy or specifically tried to train myself to be more empathetic. I’ve never taken any kind of Voight-Kampff test to see how empathetic I am.

Practices like user research and deliverables like user personas certainly embody the concept of empathy, but so does the work of countless other professions — artists/illustrators, doctors, marketers, cops, salespeople, journalists, social workers, politicians, even management. Many of them even specifically include empathy training as part of their academic curricula and professional development programs.

Conversely, I’ve met information architects who are very good at what they do but who don’t strike me as particularly empathetic. Pig headedness, self-aggrandizement, insensitivity, and other non-empathetic personality traits haven’t stood in the way of people becoming excellent at many important aspects of IA. How have we come to claim empathy as a faculty we posess and utilize more than people in other professions do?

Defining the Term

Personally, I’ve tried to avoid using the term since IMHO it conjures up a lot of unprofessional connotations: Like a person in a job interview who claims “I like working with people“, a claim to be empathetic can suggest just the opposite: that one needs to make an overt concerted effort to be empathetic to compensate for a more fundamental shortcoming of the faculty. I’m not even sure we agree on what it means, since for most people it seems to have more of an emotional connotation, and emotion is a subject that IAs rarely, if ever, actually discuss.

bladerunner_empathy_02.jpg

“Did you ever take that test yourself?”

What do you think? Is it fair of user experience designers or information architects to claim “empathy” as a something that makes us special?

For kicks, here’s a real-world empathy test. I took it myself and scored pretty much in the very middle of the empathy range. It hardly seems very scientifically legit, but give it a shot. I doubt too many IAs would score very highly on this particular measure of empathy.

There’s a Ring at Lincoln Center, and it ain’t Wagner

August 27th, 2006

brahms.gif

Johannes Brahms, clearly pissed off at Avery Fisher Hall. How is it possible that New York’s most dedicated Brahms lovers can excuse Lincoln Center?

A couple of nights ago I went to see a concert of chamber music by Beethoven, Mozart, and Brahms at Lincoln Center’s Avery Fisher Hall, on one of the final nights of the Mostly Mozart festival. (Just for the record, I’m not a big classical music concertgoer and I generally don’t know what I’m talking about, but my wife and brother in law have for years been great about helping me learn and appreciate classical music more and more.)

All of the performances were excellent as far as I could tell, but the final peice, a Brahms sextet, was what all three of us were really looking forward to.

Sadly — and shockingly — the Brahms was utterly unlistenable due to a nearly-constant and totally mysterious high-pitched ringing sound that marred nearly every note from the beginning to the end of the peice. The sound seemed to come from everywhere and nowhere, as if it were simply part of the space itself or coming from the rafters above. It would generally, but not always, coincide with an energetic violin phrase or a loud segment of music. And since the peice was dominated by the violins, the noise was present to some degree for (I would estimate) nearly a third of the peice’s entire duration.

When the noise first started, I glanced around to see what it was (assuming it was someone’s cell phone), and the first thing I noticed was the hearing aid in the ear of the gentleman sitting next to me. But the sound didn’t seem to come from the hearing aid — it was coming from everywhere at once. This wasn’t some subtle easily-ignored sound, either. It sounded like someone’s wristwatch alarm or cell phone was going off every five seconds. Or more like a hundred people’s wristwatches were going off, all very quietly but adding up to something quite substantial.

I wondered if it was just me, something screwed up with my ears. And yet I noticed a similar discomfort in the faces of my wife and brother-in-law sitting next to me. The three of us kept glancing at each other with pained looks every time the noises resumed, in perfect synch. It wasn’t just me. MORE…