Assignment 1: Response

Natalie Jeremijenko and Benjamin Bratton explore the dilemma of aesthetic presentation in pervasive data collection-- in the the discourse of eco-activism and individual empowerment in the context of the trend in data-centric production of new media art. The concept of "ubiquitous" aggregation of data through sensing techniques invites their analysis of the politics of both authority as it pertains to the element of the "missing expert" and of non-human objects as receptacles for meaning in the wider social construct. The theme of their discussion focuses largely on the dilemma of fact, what is taken as fact and by whom. They question the conclusions that such data presents, and who is responsible for the conditions and methods that lead to such conclusions. Although institutionalized control of data collection techniques may prompt us to question the integrity of the facts presented, Jeremijenko and Bratton convey an opportunity for the artist to present data as malleable, open source and non-expert. Jeremijenko's reference to "structures of participation" conveys an acknowledgement that there is a need to augment the relevance of these streams in the lives of the individual, while also providing the individual with a legitimacy as both an investigator and a change agent.

In her discussion of the interface, I agree with Jeremijenko's assertions that refining the aesthetic production as a means to present a compelling finding that resonates with the "everyman" has a better chance to further spurn advocacy both locally and more widely if such an approach is repeated through locales. Her engagement of the audience in the most visceral sense is what I appreciate most about Jeremijenko's works. She places the physical object in the center, as a force that must be acknowledged and questioned. In her piece No-Park she places the object in a public space of high foot and automobile traffic-- where the piece commands acknowledgment and invites the question "why". The invitation for questioning is thrust even more directly toward the spectator in her "tad pole walker" project http://www.ted.com/talks/natalie_jeremijenko_the_art_of_the_eco_mindshift.html (Video: start 3:23), in which tad poles are immersed in various water supplies and paraded through public areas as part of a study of water quality on tad pole development.

Although I applaud Jeremijenko's efforts to empower the public at large through education on how to transform the robotic dog into an instrument of data collection, I see the role of her as single source supplier as a problem. She is controlling the means by which data is collected for others in advising them, thus participating directly in the issue of data integrity. What if all of the sensors she promoted were not manufactured properly and thus collecting data that is inaccurate? Does the individual activist / artist / non-scientist have the means to question this? As her group is a singular entity with a mission, supported by a narrative, it participates as a political body-- a politicization that both Jeremijenko and Bratton imply would be best avoided with the effort to more effectively reach the average person.

In referencing work that I feel alludes to issues of environment and consequence more effectively is Olafur Eliasson's The Weather Project: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/3606332/A-terrifying-beauty.html (The Telegraph: "A Terrifying Beauty") With the scale of its presentation, a cataclysmic sun hanging in their midst, the audience is forced to contemplate its meaning relative to our own existence-- a starkness that loudly calls for social mobility.

Reading Response 1 - Situated Advocacy

The article hits on quite a few important points, the first being that of data quality. It’s such an important topic yet it is easy to overlook in any visualization, especially when the viewer is unfamiliar with the process. A very close friend of mine is working on community-level environmental action programs in lower income Chicago neighborhoods and has told me that often the participants in their field studies do not understand the difference between weather and climate. If the target of environmental awareness has trouble discerning between macro and micro levels of information, it is probably safe to assume that little thought is even given to the source of the data and the implications of its quality in regards to the information they are being presented with. If the target audience is so detached from the data gathering process, how can the visualization of the culled information really have any meaning? Bratton hits on this idea in referencing the “beautiful ‘data-smog’ projects modeling ambient urban-environmental information in one way or another” that are essentially more works of art than deployable information systems. Not only can the source of data be called in to question here but also its presentation. Transparency and accessibility are key in conveying information to those unfamiliar with any subject.

Jeremijenko’s Environmental Health Clinic is surely a clever idea, especially by making use of the idea that doctors operate outside of politics. This addresses the transparency of information, but is it accessible? In terms of low-income neighborhoods, how likely is a resident going visit an Environmental Health Clinic? The issue is deepened further when Bratton & Jeremijenko talk about better datasets by way of the collection and submission of individuals. In areas of concern, how realistic is it to think that residents have access to computers, an internet connection, and the ability to install sensors? It’s a wonderful dream.

The ability to translate data to information, and to advise an action based on it is powerful. In Manual Castell’s “Rise of the Network Society” there is a major idea where the network (internet) allows for a horizontal power system - more smaller nodes can connect to, inform, and react to one another. This is in opposition to the vertical power structure, typical of most any governmental structure where there is top-down flow of information and orders. In the vertical system the lower tiers have less ability to effect the higher tiers, whereas in the horizontal system “power in numbers” takes precedence and the flow of data is more evenly distributed. To this Bratton & Jeremijenko are much aligned when they speak of greater numbers of data sources being gathered and submitted by non-political entities. The power is there, so how do we make it work? The horizontal power structure has edges when you bring it back to low income areas. It is in these areas where the vertical power structure is still at work because the horizontal system is inaccessible. Does the increase in data availability on the horizontal system further separate it from those who are under a vertical system? It’s a bit of a side-track, but it’s something the article has made me think about. It’s not just an issue of awareness, but of haves and have nots, of surveillance versus sensing, of making real connections that matter beyond social networking, and of trust in the power of the systems at use.

Daniel Bennett - Reading Response 1

In the their published series of conversations, “Situated Technologies Pamphlets 3: Suspicious Images, Latent Interfaces, “ Benjamin H. Bratton and Natalie Jeremijenko attempt to “explore the implications of ubiquitous computing for architecture and urbanism: how our experience of space and the choices we make within it are affected by a range of mobile, pervasive, embedded, or otherwise “situated” technologies." The impetuous of the discussion is how to reassign agency to various groups to collect, analyze and implement various forms of data.

The authors begin by noticing a flaw within the way data can be misrepresented in it’s display through various visualizations. The data itself at it’s current state is flawed, data that is presented “without asking how the data is generated, who collected it and under what conditions. That is, what does the data actually represent? The criticism of how the data is produced is left out.” The breakdown is that the majority of data sets (especially in health and environmental areas are only amassed when they are need for research to a solution. Having said this, the research is conducted by “non-experts” and the wrong agendas are being considered during collection. So as we dig we find the problem lies deeper than the visualizations of this data, or that the data is gleaned without proper consideration. It can go as deep as why/how the data is required and who sets this collection into action, those in position to say we need collection (which in itself colors the data before it’s even considered HOW to collect the data).

They identify the status quo of public agents that are elected (or are un/officially represented) by peoples or organizations that have an inherent agenda. The two identify this problem as a loss of participation in the choice of change/observance by electing someone to make a decision, saying that by voting you are giving up your right to affect a change in those decisions.

“Democracy of representation or representation of democracy.” Particularly Jeremijenko believes that those inhabiting the space should be collecting the data that affects themselves, “those with less purchasing power have less agency to affect the public space and act upon environmental issues that are immediately important to them.” She calls it a bottom-up approach. This data can be analyzed by the artist/analyst to mitigate what is actually being represented. “I have always defended both the amateur and the role of the artist in complex technical phenomena, in biotech [other field listed]” she says, which has a history in current art/action projects. Steve Kurtz and Critical Art Ensemble (CAE) have drawn attention to genetically modified food (Free Range Grain), genetic research and use among others. As a side, Kurtz stood trial and was acquitted because of his use of material.

Both Bratton and Jeremijenko believe there is an immense usefulness in having the public sector collect information. While I do think it is a crucial role the citizens of a locale perform, I believe it should first be organized and mitigated by an artist. This leads to a social trending that puts the research ahead of dredging through what a group of data is suggestion simply by initial analysis. This could be akin to a scientific method approach: hypothesize, predict, test, evaluate/improve, resolution.

An example of this “middle down, then back up” approach can be seen in research initiated by Microsoft called photosynth (TED talk, Important info @ 3:30). All the photographs on Flickr.com are tagged with metadata (informational data added to networked content). Photosynth marries these interconnected packets of content to form a much broader and complete view of our world. By another user linking to my content it then enriches my content itself. From these spaces purposed by artists, viewers can participate and see what is happening though action. This could be an example of as Bratton cites, “image of the collective …They are political images, and forms of “post- social” collective representation.” Through the collective we can both produce and observe what social trends are actually occurring.

An interesting check and artist could provide between taxpayers and legislators is one of ethical supervisor. An example of homeless-proof public structures could be altered, maybe instead of the homeless sleeping on benches as a problem, you could address the homeless population's struggles in your community.

Chaz Evans - Jerimijenko/Bratton response

In this conversation Bratton and Jerimijenko discuss the role and impact of ubiquituos computing on participatory democracy and environmental health. A central motif and question that they often coming back to is how do non-human objects have more agency in a "parlaiment of things"? Can this be achieved with more sensors on more non-humans reporting back more data, and then who collects, interprets, and has access to this data? For the most part the two of them, and especially Jerimijenko, advocate for a more decentralized collection of data where anyone can participate in the production of knowledge toward environmental health. Bratton is a little skeptical of this, as it sounds like a cliche open-source kind of ideology to him. Jerimijenko sticks to the importance of this open data system, but also suggests that the way to establish such an open data-collection system is through the actions of the artist as a "non-expert expert" who stands in for the everyman in a discussion with scientists.

I really like this article because there is so much to agree with and so much to jump in and start taking positions against, reading makes its own micro-politics between the conversants and the reader. But, Jeremijenko's position to me sounds self-contradictory in that she seems to like the idea of increased agency and a broadened base of participatory democracy, but this cannot come about without embracing a certain degree of elitism to bring this about. The everyman represents themself by letting the artist represent them. This doesn't quite make sense. Artists speaking on behalf of everyone is just as dubious as scientists doing the same thing.

But as contentious as that stance is, they both really bring it back around in a nice way when they discuss how the inflexibility of a system is what allows flexibility to flow through it. This I think I'm very on board with, and I also think may help defray Jerimijenko's artist-favoring comments. What I think they are getting at is you need to have some infrastructure, and its needs to work well, but it only needs to determine really low level decisions. This infrastructure of course would have some impact on its use, but perhaps with that little bit of autonomy taken away, a small possibly trivial group decision, a relatively open and variable system can flow through. To put this is far simpler and perhaps reductive terms a little organization goes a long way. This seems to resonate with Cory Doctorow's Siggraph keynote speech where he went about discussing a copyright system in very similar terms. We need copyright, but only a little bit of copyright that doesn't micromanage and speak for people it shouldn't. Once a copyright system gets too specific and begins to micromanage, it only priviledges those who established the system and no longer benefits those it was supposedly made for. This seems like a nice balance point on the scale of control. We don't have to be 100 percent anti-system or 100 percent modernist tyrant. We can take a little of the latter and get a lot of the former.

Reading Response 1-Jon Chambers

With all of this information that communities and societies can gain access to from remote sensors all over the world, how do we use this data for change and progress? Jeremijenko  and Bratton seem to think that this information can change the contemporary authoritative structure by giving access to “the people”; information that was until recently only afforded to scientists, or as they call them, “experts”.  This article starts out by critiquing data visualizations made from ubiquitous sensing as a mode for authoritarian representation. Jeremijenko states that “The criticism of how the data is produced is left out; unless this criticism is engaged, it doesn’t make for a meaningful visualization. If we don’t question how the data is made, we cannot make sense of it. Producing a nice diagram is not all that is required in making sense of something.” (13) By being able to gather and critique this data that is usually reserved for the “expert” community, people can change the power structure: “So we can have (and have had) environmental data collection, and we have a regime where most of the data collection has been done under these regulatory compliance protocols. And now we have the capacity to have this collection occur under alternate pro­tocols or through a different institutional framework, operating with different models of participation.”(20) They seem to think that it is the artist’s role to interpret this data into a meaningful interface for the community.

For instance, Jeremijenko’s project Environmental Health Clinic, prescribes her patients to change the way they live/behave in order to become healthier. She states an example about asthma, and that instead of pumping your child up with medicine, change the air quality in the environment. That sound great, and I suppose they could ride a bike instead of a car, but how can the individual compete with the corporation? They are the ones doing major polluting, so this idea of collective power through gathering sensor data doesn’t really do anything unless the power structure in society can change. Jeremijenko states that, “The capacity to contest, to be in the position to have an opinion, to question the evidence, is where these ubiquitous computation devices can really contribute.” (34) This could happen, but I don’t think through gathering data and showing that you have different data than the government or regulatory companies will change too much.

Later in the article, Jeremijenko states that, “There is a crisis of agency that may or may not be resolved by and/or attributed to the technologies of ubiquitous computing and sensing.” (38) She then goes on to talk about how environmental agencies are conflated with consumer dollars “with the responsibil­ity of your consumption”(38) I though this was great. Bratton then says, “And in that scenario, the image of the future is for data clouds to render on the sides of cereal boxes, where, for example, the transparency of their conditions of assemblage and “carbon footprints” become the discourse through which these objects display themselves to us as interfaces into a vast supply-chain.”(39) The image of being green or healthy is another interface sold to consumers. They then critique that the idea of buying into this corporate green movement image isn’t really doing anything and that one should question the motives of these corporations.  So again, there is a problem with the image of data.

Reading this article and thinking about how the world is becoming one big sensor, reminded me of the Pachube project created by Usman Haque. There are sensors from all over the world being fed into this database and anyone else can harvest this data. I do find myself asking the same questions in the article: why do we need all of this data and how can we make it meaningful? Is measuring the wind in China arbitrary? I will admit, though, that it is cool.

Response, Week 1: Suspicious Images, Latent Interfaces

Natalie Jeremijenko and Benjamin Brittan’s pamphlet “Suspicious Images, Latent Interfaces” introduces a critique of what can often prove a critique-less form of information gathering and distribution, including the current InfoViz craze. Both understand that data is never neutral, indicating both a bias of the source and its purveyor. They demand a criticality that assigns agency to all relevant parties, as well as a recognition of the political possibilities of the project. As Jeremijenko sketches some of her own hyper-critical and political projects, both she and Brittan challenge existing modes of representation through “computational media” (Brittan’s phrase) and attempt to delineate a practice that uses these tools to engage in an experimental political practice.

One of the greatest strengths of this conversation is the conviction of both the participants; this, of course, is backed by both Jeremijenko and Brittan’s practices, interventions into some of the greatest monoliths in modern society - for example, Jeremijenko’s The Environmental Health Clinic challenges deep-seeded beliefs embedded in the medicalization of society, where the environmental causes of “disease” are often ignored as the assumption indicates the functioning of the body as internalized and individual.

An unfortunate example of this, outside of the text, can be found in the Pilsen neighborhood of Chicago’s near southwest side. The Sun-Times ran an article this summer that indicated that this neighborhood has levels of lead that are 10 times the EPA safety regulations. According to relevant medical literature, lead poisoning is often a cause for concern amongst children of low-income families, as childhood learning disabilities and longterm health concerns often go unnoticed. In conjunction with soil concerns, the Fisk Coal Plant is responsible for making Pilsen one of the worst neighborhoods in terms of air quality, and has long been connected with the sharp rise in childhood asthma in that area.

The real test, it seems, is to turn the idea of what constitutes “truth” or “authority” upside-down, and to re-present the data in a way that turns a critical eye toward the producer and consumer. In addition, there exists a challenge to the viewer - there is a distinct provocation, or at least an opportunity, to act. For example, the Yes Men cultivated a hoax protest against a coal plant being built in a wealthy neighborhood: http://www.wbez.org/blog/justin-kaufmann/2011-04-28/yes-men-behind-coal-power-plant-hoax-south-loop-85804

This protest highlights their occupation of the Fisk Coal Plant entrance, where they resurrected their “SurvivalBalls” project about a year and half ago: http://www.babelgum.com/clips/4006996

The Sun-Times article about lead levels: http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/health/5979756-423/lead-levels-too-high-in-pilsen-early-epa-study-finds.html

The Pilsen Environmental Rights and Reform Organization (P.E.R.R.O.) has launched their own website with information about the negative effects of the Fisk Generating Station: http://www.pilsenperro.org/coalpower.htm

Instructable Featured

My instructable has also been featured under the technology & technology/arduino section

Featured Link

Tweet at your place (the analog way) / Phase III

Final Position Statement


It is impressive how easy is to connect with people through online platforms like Facebook or Twitter. Nowadays we broadcast our lives to the world through microblogging or status messages. Of course the global village presents endless beautiful consequences, but at the same time, the more interconnected we are while using these platforms, the less connected we are to the people that surrounds us in our everyday life.

Some decades ago, people lives were interrelated with their neighbours, while now our cell phones, as well as our online platforms create the paradox or being more strongly connected with more distant people than with our neighbours. This easy to make DIY project pretends to blend the beautiful things of both worlds: connectivity with the people that surrounds us.

We live in neighborhoods that are composed not only by houses, but also by people. Nevertheless our relation to them is often nearly non-existent. The paradox of being easier to broadcast a status message about us to the whole world through tweeter as opposed to the difficulty of expressing our ideas to the people that literally surrounds us is at stake.

Tweet at your place is a DIY kit to allows you to microbolg (like we do on Twitter) in the facades of our homes in a completely “analog” way.

Photos of components + usage




































Instructables:


Tweet at your place! (the analog way) - More DIY How To Projects

Geocache-A-Forest DIY Kit

Geocache-A-Forest DIY Kit - More DIY How To Projects

Milk Crate "Air-Pot" Urban Container Gardening

Milk Crate "Air-Pot" Urban Container Gardening

Keep your cell phones on. The movie is about to start. (Cinema Squared position statement)

What I enjoyed the most about this project was the simple twists. As artists we are always looking for ways to create spectacle for people, but the programmer part of us either wants it to be either radically complex or subversively simple. I went with a hybrid of taking the push towards folding and geometries into a single fold and a few cuts to get my audience straight into the concept of creating a social space. What I enjoy best about the social space I've constructed is that it has layers of use. There is the makers, the users, and the audience. Social in all aspects. The makers are a part of the instructable diy community and share projects everyday, the project pretty much requires two users and can engage them into a social space that allows for more serious conversations about optical qualities, light, beauty and more -- and lastly the audience (if the users can find one) will collectively enjoy the other side of the looking glass - that is the magic portrayed on the screen.

Out of concern that it may over-construct the experience or over shape it, I have opted to avoid the original plan for the web site/blog. I will only utilize the instructables site because I feel that is the best way to not become the architect of the experience, and instead just lay the foundation for users to create their own experience with the project.

Better than a barrel full of sea monkeys! The project relies on projection but modern signifier of quality do not apply. Resolution, size, etc are all construct of consumerism in media and this project aims to put back storytelling into the picture and often takes the shape of the fire on the wall or the storyteller in the village standing by the fire weaving a good one as you sit there in a late evening haze.

Cinema Squared

Cinema Squared! Yes, you are seeing double -- - More DIY How To Projects

DIY phase 3, Joe Pankowski

http://thestoryhat.blogspot.com/

http://www.instructables.com/id/The-Story-Hat/

Final Position Statement

Though the process of creating a DIY project I have stuck pretty close to my original idea of creating plans for people to create a zoetrope hat. The most challenging aspect of this process was making a clear and deceive set of instructions for a person other then myself to follow. Usually when I'm making something I put it though a number of edits and these edits are usually built on one another until it works without putting in any consideration that someone would need or want to reproduce it.

The bases for the hat was to create a portable conversation piece that made the wearer a performer. I was inspired on my daily walk from school to the train station and in seeing the various ways street performers have their very own skill to create their own niche in a very difficult profession. I thought about what I would do to survive in such an environment and thats when this idea of the story hat came to me.

I hope that people will see this project and want to reproduce it, but add their own personal touches. For example, instead of making the hat and gears from paper I hope they use other materials and I hope I can encourage them to share their adaptations. I also hope I can get feed back on how to better the instructions. I really see these DIY kits as a launch pad for others creativity.

Tweet at your place / Instructable

Here is the link to the published instructable: http://www.instructables.com/id/Tweet-at-your-place-the-analog-way/


Update: it looks like the project has been featured:
http://www.instructables.com/outside/?show=FEATURED


Julio

DIY PROJECT | PHASE III | JD PIRTLE

FINAL POSITION STATEMENT


As my first DIY project intended for the public, I have struggled quite a bit with what it was I wanted to put forward—both in terms of the physical project itself and how I would contextualize my work in the form of a $25 DIY kit meant to create social space. My background is primarily in making work that is screen-based and computational, so I spent a great deal of time in the ideation phase for this project. Since it is theme-specific, and as the final kits were required to be under $25 to build, I initially felt severely limited in any project I wanted to create.

In the end, I decided to perfect a simple momentary switch I had built for a few projects in the past. It is an extremely simple DIY electronics project, but I feel that it is one that beginning makers might wish to try. It is easy to integrate into a variety of projects, and has myriad uses. Parallel to this process, I had been experimenting with trapezoidal pleating, particularly for folded paper forms. After a few weeks of research and trial-and-error, I came up with a pattern and methodology to fold diamond pleated paper forms that were suitable for my piece. I created a template in Adobe Illustrator that anyone can download to create a similar paper form—with additions or subtractions to the fold intersections, the template can be modified to make many different shapes. In an effort to show how flexible this basic switch was to make and implement, I incorporated the switch into floor tile and a simple circuit (which was housed within the paper form).

I consider this my first effort at contributing to the DIY community. I found the entire process of framing the work for an anonymous person to recreate to be very interesting, and plan to continue to publish aspects of my future projects in this manner. The DIY art/makers movement is very similar to the Open Source software movement, in that it lays bare all processes and material used to make a certain thing—by doing so, one not only exhibits his or her work, but gives others insight into their process and enables them to recreate or modify this work as they will.



link to PDF of final instructions


link to instructables.com project

pHloat Kit :: pHase III

Video:

pHloat

pHloat Blog

Instructables

Final Instructions

Final Position Statement:

pHloat is a DIY kit that is made for use in conjunction with a pre-owned / pre-existing arduino microcontroller. Its purpose is to test the pH levels in local rivers, lakes, and streams due to the influx of air and water pollution often caused by acid rain. It is specifically designed to be used in areas that are home to refineries, chemical plants, and manufacturing industries that cause environmental damage. However, it can be used in any body of water to test acidity levels.

pHloat functions through the modification of a simple garden moisture and pH sensor that can be purchased at any home improvement store. It acts as both an environmental measurement tool and a floating sculpture, borrowing inspiration from Japanese floating paper lanterns. As the pHloat is placed in a body of water or stream it is taking a constant pH reading that is being translated by the arduino to produce a variation of colored light. The different colors of light indicate the level of acidity in the body of water. For example, a normal pH reading would result in the emission of green light while a high pH reading would result in the emission of blue light. The light is housed on the top of the pHloat and is illuminated under a paper origami shade. As to not further contribute to environmental pollution, a rope should be attached to each pHloat so it can easily be retrieved from the water.

pHloat is designed to create a social awareness of pollution in local rivers, streams, and lakes. It also functions as visual expression of concern for the emission of dangerous chemicals into our atmosphere. pHloats are designed to be released together to ultimately create floating mobile sculptures. Thus initiating a social space that engages locals living in the midst of these manufacturing industries to begin a dialogue about their environmental conditions.

The pHloat has undergone a couple major design changes. It was first made from several recyclable materials including a large array of plastic bottles to allow it to float on water, which made it much larger in size. In the redesign, several form changes were made. pHloat2 is about half the size of the original design but still functions the same. pHloat2 can still be made from several recycled materials including but not limited to Styrofoam, plastic food containers, rope, and paper. If these materials cannot be found they can be purchased along with the necessary electrical components for approximately $25. The kit has also been scaled down down to save on material cost and waste. Instructions can be found in the kit, on instructables.com and at the blog phloatkits.tumblr.com

The kit is best suited for anyone interested in pursuing an entry level arduino based project or lower level science class interested in pollution effects on water quality. The kit is easy to assemble and a fun way to investigate building fro recyclable materials, use of microcontrollers, and practicing sustainable paper structures.

physical simulations in Processing

related to our recent topics, here are some excellent physical simulations in Processing by Nils Seifert

Kit publised in intructables.com

Insoles as habitats Kit - More DIY How To Projects

Response - Responsive Architecture /Subtle Technologies

The intermingling of space, the senses, experience and the structures that govern all this are explored in a series of articles dealing with all of these in an architectural research oriented way. I was especially interested in fo.am's 'grow your own world' philosophy and their transdisciplinary research lab. I've had ideas similar to the groworld project that they explain here. There is an intrinsic beauty in the way movement through space is translated to something like a response from the environment. Making it alive and living in real-time rather than making aesthetically pleasing deadpan objects that simply are there as utility or objects that people can gawk at.

Transforming a space to merge with the surroundings and be pertinent to the reason the space exist have all been the methods by which architecture has been designed all this while. Adding the living dimension to it where the structures move, respond and behave based on actions on it is absolutely magical and will certainly evoke interest in the spaces themselves. Adaptation will also be an important factor for these spaces because designing such responsive spaces means they need to be able to adapt to changes to the environment and actors on the spaces too. The articles provide a nice overview of existing research on such environments and throws light on where they can be improved upon.

Morphogenetic Design - Response

The reading shows that design is becoming more inter-disciplinary than ever before borrowing from biology and nature too along with its old friends, physics and chemistry. Designers, Engineers and architects now are looking at cross-disciplinary subjects like biomimicry which looks natural methods for manufacturing,design and imitating mechanisms found in nature. I remember a story of Tesla as a child where he manufactured a 16-bug powered motor out of live June bugs which if there was a photograph of it would look much like devices we see today in DARPA funded research (except that it was cheaper and did much less than the latter.) Inventors and scientists have always looked at nature to provide answers to questions on improving existing designs and manufacture novel contraptions.

It also gives us a magnificient overview of the process of design, prototyping and manufacturing of large scale structures true to the concepts they are trying to mimick. The advances in technology also help to drive down the costs and time it takes to design such close to nature objects that live symbiotically with nature and invites it to participate and enhance the strength of the design as it lives in the environment. The dikes of Holland being re-engineered to gain strength over time based on the interaction with the sea and sand is one such example. Advances in computing is also improving the designs with new algorithms that work with complex systems, parametric equations which in turn are prototyped quickly with machines that can talk to these computers quicker.


Overall, the reading gave us a detailed overview of morphogenetic design concepts, lots of examples, real building prototypes and engineered structures that have been deployed successfully.