The file-burning stove

One technique for managing paperwork that's fairly common in productivity circles is the Noguchi filing system, in which files are always re-filed on the left of a shelf. This results in a gradient of freshness, with old or stale files naturally sorting themselves to the right, whence they can be discarded or permanently archived.

It's a nice system, but the archiving/discarding triage takes such effort doesn't it? Once those files have made their way to the back or the bottom of the filing cabinet, wouldn't it be nice if your filing system automatically and judiciously took care of that for you.

File-burning stove
And kept you warm.

We're hiring a BlackBerry/.Net developer in Brighton

We're hiring a developer to build mobile software products that help police forces and other government orgs communicate quicker/better. Messaging, photos, maps, presence, ajax, compliance, etc. Technically, it's generally BlackBerry J2ME mobile client and ASP.Net web/backend. More details on the role here.

We do scrum. We are nice people and have a shiny office in the middle of Brighton.

We're also looking for a good QA person in Brighton.

Ping us with your story at hello at mobbu dot com.

Maintenance, or the keeping of too much at hand, having delivered too much

The crossed tools of maintenance

Henry VII passed a law against "maintenance", the keeping at hand of too many male "servants" - contracted men-at-arms, private armies financially retained by powerful noblemen in the power vacuum after the Wars of the Roses. (The word maintenance derives from the Latin manu tenere, to hold in the hand, ie: to keep in a condition of effective functional condition: keeping at hand functionally.)

The visual evidence of this surplus and illegal retainer was the overuse of a nobleman's livery (whereas the visual evidence these days of maintenance, seems to be a spanner - a tool rather than an emblem). In legal terms at least - "retaining", "livery" and "maintenance" seem to have had the same meaning. And the term livery derives from the French livrée, meaning delivered: typically the object or a servant/messenger bore the livery of the noble that owned, retained or had sent them.

Thus maintenance would become a punishment for delivery, which may be a hollow joke for some of us working in technology. And every now and then, when reading contracts, I would like to follow Henry VII's lead and pass a law against maintenance.

Policing news; BlackBerry management tips

The Cabinet Office is providing £75m to get 25,000 mobile devices in the hands of police officers, the funding being managed by the National Policing Improvement Agency. It's quite hard to find consistent coverage of the story in the mainstream press, so we're tracking the story on the Mobbu blog as it unfolds:

And Alex is starting to post some useful tips on device and application management with BlackBerry Enterprise Manager:

How Lighthouse ticket-tracking currently uses Markdown for lists

We are gradually switching from Mantis to Lighthouse for ticket tracking at work because it's a great ticketing system, and more customer-friendly than Mantis because it's simpler. Lighthouse uses Markdown as its text-formatting "language". But we've had some problems getting text formatting to work well, partly because we're habituated to writing content in Textile-format in Basecamp, partly because we do lots of structured lists in our tickets, and partly because Lighthouse's implementation of Markdown lists is currently a bit idiosyncratic.

So here are some rules of thumb for making lists work in Lighthouse. As the developers improve it, I'll come back and edit this post. (I hope this also helps the developers updating the documentation and, preferably, the code: Lighthouse is a great product but we'd love to see a less brittle and more consistent implementation of Markdown lists.)

  1. Every list must have a blank line above it and one beneath it. Else, your list will break horribly. (Also don't do a numbered list, then have a blank line, then do another list: it'll continue your first list.)
  2. Nested/hierarchic lists work slightly differently for numbers and bullets:
    • To do a second-level bullet (a "child") you do space-space-*
    • To do a second-level number (a "child") you do space-space-space-1. That it's different from the way bullets are handled is probably a bug.
    • To do a third-level bullet (a "grand-child") you do tab-*
    • To do a third-level number (a "grand-child") you do tab-tab-1.
    • To do a fourth-level bullet (a "great grand-child") you do tab-tab-*
    • To do a fourth-level number (a "great grand-child") you do tab-tab-tab-1.
  3. Mix numbers and bullets very carefully in nested lists: numbers should not contain bullets as children because the bullets tend to kill the number order of the parents...

Some examples. A list of bullets that works:

* parent
  * child (space-space-bullet)
    * grandchild (tab-bullet)
        * great-grandchild (tab-tab-bullet)
* parent
  * child (space-space-bullet)
    * grandchild (tab-bullet)
        * great-grandchild (tab-tab-bullet)
    * grandchild (tab-bullet)
  * child (space-space-bullet)
* parent

A list of numbers that works:

1. parent
   1. child (space-space-space-number) - nb, here it's a triple-space, not the double-space you'd do for a child bullet
   1. child (space-space-space-number)
        1. grandchild (tab-tab-number) - again, not the same as it is with bullets. And nb now you can't do a fourth, great-grandchild, level of numbers.
1. parent
   1. child (space-space-space-number)
   1. child (space-space-space-number)
        1. grandchild (tab-tab-number)
   1. child (space-space-space-number)
1. parent

And a list with both bullets and numbers that doesn't work in Lighthouse:

1. parent
   1. child (space-space-space-number)
   1. child (space-space-space-number)
    * grandchild (tab-bullet)
        * great-grandchild (tab-tab-bullet)
   1. child (space-space-space-number) - here the number order has been broken by the preceding bullet
        1. grandchild (tab-tab-number)
        1. grandchild (tab-tab-number)
   1. child (space-space-space-number)
    * grandchild (tab-bullet)
    * grandchild (tab-bullet)
   1. child (space-space-space-number) - again number order broken by preceding bullet
        1. grandchild (tab-tab-number)
        1. grandchild (tab-tab-number)
1. parent
   1. child (space-space-space-number)

There may be a better/more robust way to do nested lists, but I haven't found it yet. (Nested lists seem to work quite differently in Markdown, but to be fair to Lighthouse here, it does all seem a bit arbitrary in Markdown. Markdown seems more powerful than Textile, but also more complex, so maybe I don't understand it well enough yet.)

See also: Lighthouse commits to Markdown over Textile; Markdown syntax and testing doobry; a Lighthouse ticket discussing this very matter.

dConstruct 2007: raise your hopes

Jared Spool aneurysmQuickly then, two eves and a day of experience, quickly compressed into an undifferentiated slab. In a bar on Brighton's stag night strip: an outdoor terrace packed with familiar and new faces, and a queue on the fire escape to access it. Queues will be cited the next morning. We are in town for dConstruct, a conference on user experience or experience design. Some of what I heard and thought follows and there are poor drawings. Apple and Flickr are good at design, and Microsoft and Nokia and nearly everyone else are not so good. That is law. Being an expert is good, but some things are inexplicable juju - unless you do them a lot, in which case you might become an expert. Queues are a floating signifier: either the hallmark of excellent design or the symptom of ballsed supply chain management. The history of consumer electronics starts with an experiential promise - Eastman (Kodak): "you press the button, we do the rest". This same history has technology giving way to features, and features to experience and simplicity. The history of aerial warfare starts with vision (reconnaissance) and develops towards projected force (machine guns) via a bias for problem-solving instead of solutions-provision (I have no problem with the design takeaway, but wonder if Sven Lindqvist might tell a different history that starts with projected force (bombs from balloons) and ends with panoptic reconnaissance and un-manned strikes). Steve Jobs 1984, 2007: time is even crueller to humans than it is products. Jeff Hawkins: the block of wood story which begat the Palm Pilot = good experience design. But the more interesting question: if the same man and approach was also responsible for the recent Foleo car-crash, then how to make it more likely you'll consistently have product hits? That Flickr started as a feature in a now defunct game is well-known; how does this open-ness to unintended consequences and adaptation tally against the much-cited iPod, whose claimed excellent design derives from an iron-grip on the product and service experience? The father of Waterfall secretly coveted next door's younger baby, Agile. Waterfall as haircut can look good, but as process is bad for designers and humans (well, always?). Reassuringly, user-centred design and agile development can (be made to) live together in perfect harmony. A sofa invites intimacy and anecdote - an unstated Gricean maxim of conversation? Swear-filters invite language reuse; people that write paragraphs like this are clearly utter cranberries. We don't like to offend our computers. Nor our conversations: implicature is what we do in bringing expectations about intentionality and meaning to a conversation, transaction or experience, via a mental model. Your website is not (the limit of) your product: your product reaches out into the network, and this is to be encouraged. Design for always-already reused. Nit-picking: experience/web/internetty design conferences tend to privilege performative and presentational competence, with corresponding risks. That a design proposal can legitimately be called a prototype. That dogma abounds: Apple/experience design good, Microsoft/non-experiental design bad. And that simplicity veneers a necessary complexity. But that's the nature of talks. There wasn't much new content, but the speakers performed really well. I must stop whining from the sides, raise my game and raise my hopes (that courtesy Arthur Davies, via his proud dad). The Market Diner is still a good place to go when the Meat Reaper comes calling in the middle of the night; Bill's is the lunchtime restorative. The event was really well organised by Clearleft and Brighton was in good form. At its social, playful best dConstruct felt like Reboot, and the return to Londra was an ascent back to the surface after a stag night's beer and talk. Good fun thx.

(Architectural metaphors in (sport) metaphors in business)

If you work in software, you're used to hearing metaphors borrowed from architecture and physical construction: technical architects, software engineers, building the software, "supporting" software, servers falling over, pipes, wiring, flows... (Eric Evans is not a fan of the production line or architecture metaphors, and considers experimental science or literature as more appropriate analogues -- the latter recalling Paul Graham comparing hacking to painting, and in turn Maciej Ceglowski's rebuttal -- before deciding that the metaphoric approach is in the end as much a veil as illumination*.)

An obvious reason that software making is a recipient of analogies is that it's a discipline that's rather opaque to those that aren't practitioners. And no doubt we could go back to Lakoff to remind ourselves why metaphors are so seductive* more generally.

And we're also used to hearing about business - about the work that is work - borrowing metaphors from sport or war: teams, winning, losing, indefensible arguments, attacking problems, taking the high ground, and so on... too many examples. (At this point in this post, I'd like you to imagine you were reading a couple of thousand words on sport as the pared-down movement-time-drama essence of social dynamics, an ideal vehicle* for bearing references to human relationships and drama. If it helps, imagine this absent description of a metaphor like Dan Hill's piece on Zidane, only not written as well.) And of course, you might push the boat out* and claim that sport is itself a ritualised, civilised form - ie metaphor - for war.

So given all that, this is interesting. Via one of the best Arsenal blogs comes Arsene Wenger offering the developing footballer as a building in an interview:

Wenger's response illuminates how he moulds stars. "You build the player like a house," he says. "The basis is the technique that happens before 12. If the player can play, the next floor is the physique at 14-15. Then it the tactical ability - how to use your technique and physique in the game.

"The last part, the roof, is the mental side. If you have no roof, it rains in your house. How competitive are you? How motivated to do well every day? That is the final step. I believe that hunger is something you get at 18 and remains relatively stable during your life. That is decided between 18 and 20. And that decides careers.

"You are not born with hunger. Roy Keane was competitive [from a young age], but why? You need to be psychoanalytical to see why. Sometimes the same adversity can have a bad effect. If you have a strong father, you can fight against him or completely lie down. Maybe Roy Keane had the first reaction, to fight the father. I don't know."

So if sport is a metaphor for war, and business borrows from sport, and software borrows from architecture, the question remains: what metaphors do architects borrow to describe their work? Answers on a postcard please - perhaps one of Rob-the-architect's.

Related: George Lakoff's Metaphors We Live By (1980/2003), Nik Boyd's Software Metaphors.

* they're everywhere, those metaphors, aren't they.

Crowd psychology: evacuation behaviour patterns

EvacuationLHR T3 evacuation excitement

A few weeks ago I went to Heathrow to meet up with and see off my beloved aunt and uncle, who'd been visiting the UK from Melbourne. I got the tube from North London, they a taxi from Harefield. But I didn't see them because Terminal 3 was evacuated due to a bomb scare. I hung around in the crowd in case I managed to see them afterwards, and started thinking about the behavioural patterns below (disclaimer: obviously, I'm not a psychologist), some of which seem equally applicable to workplace situations.

Stages of acceptance and information desire

Disbelief: waiting to be told several times in case the officer and tannoy announcements aren't really serious. The choruses of "tcha" and "gah!" and "typical" that progress through the crowd. (Is there a Kübler-Ross progression of denial, rage and later acceptance at work here?) There's an irritable obedience, as if the inconvenience is deliberately and personally targeted at us. And that obedience is minimal  - "No, keep moving back please, further back".

There's a profound information need: people want a lot of info and context, immediately and continuously. Desire to manage/minimise uncertainty/danger (and to be reassured); it's also a participatory voyeurism. If we're going to be held up and miss the plane, we want it to be something good rather than a false alarm (also because this legitimises the officials).

Authority and gossip

Officials should be omniscient: we assume they all have total information. Police and officials need an air of calm authority - they should and would never say "I don't know what the situation is". That they're bristling with kit and guns helps. But where there's an insufficiency of information, gossip and rumour necessarily emerge spontaneously. A police officer turns to another and murmurs, and we strain like night-time deer to catch and sift the sounds. News provision: many of us call or text friends to share news, boast of hardship or solicit sympathy.

Copying: if one officer stands at the border answering questions, then they'll get a steady stream of people all asking what's going on - we lurch forward, twitching that we might not be left out of the loop. (Here is where a constant broadcast of information, either over a tannoy or via mobile, would be useful. Except that often there is no news to convey.)

An hour in, there's a sound exactly halfway between a gun shot/explosion and something heavy crashing into a large metal object like a skip. Perhaps this is the destruction of the suspect package. It's an obvious sound, but none of the police react to it at all.

Herding and positioning

Herding/clustering of people: together generally. In areas of perceived value: closer to terminal (ultimate goal, minimal effort), closer to the action (immediate goal: info - again, the psychological benefits - curiosity/rubbernecking, gossip, privilege), out of rain, near seats (comfort for longer waits),  local gatherings: families, friends, people that are identified as similar. Is there an unconsciously ethnic/sociodemographic herding happening? Grudging retreat, as a herd, if a valuable area is devalued by police officers pushing people further back.

We're shooed further away from the terminal by the police, into a space usually used only for the regulated movement of cars and buses - on foot it's a no-place, the interzone. We're held here as if this vehicle corridor is a real place, outside a processing space attached to the aerial corridor.

An awareness that when the evacuation is over there will be a rush: hence positioning is important. The Dunkirk spirit is very mild at best. We're too put out by the delay, and too aware that when movement is restored, it's a zero-sum game at the bottlenecks. That awareness is like a background hum.

Advantage and prestige

The hum, that awareness - a crowd throb. Heightened awareness of factors that confer power, privilege, position or prestige. When some people move forward it's contagious: no-one wants to be demoted in position. We watch the officials closely for indicators. We're gradually jostling for position.

There's a casual swaggering from those that are official or quasi-official (seen it all before... I am apart from the crowd...) - they have a carefree world-weariness as a defence mechanism: I'm good enough that can afford not to pay attention or look alert. As a counter to this ploy, I find myself immediately imagining offering help to the police on the dubious credentials that my company does some IT for police services - it's a clear desire to separate myself from the herd.

Correspondingly, a just-perceptible hierarchy is being expressed amongst the officials: passengers < airport staff < staff with badges < staff with uniforms < police < police with small guns or in small vehicles < police with big guns/in big vehicles < specialist police with unusual uniforms or sniffer dogs < the unseen police commanders in the radios...

Taxiing and takeoff

A pair of false starts: staff go back into the building, but many of us assume that passengers can move too. These movements starts others off too. Then, an after shock: as we prepare to head back in, there are police radio rumours of another device, and we are held up another ten minutes. (How many of us are thinking of Ballard, and casting off our raiments of civilisation and rising up in a tide against the thin blue line of police and airport officialdom? Or worse, that we'll never leave, and will become tribes of T3.)

Later, as the all-clear is confirmed, there's the extraordinary sound of a thousand luggage trolleys setting off and accelerating across rough tarmac all at once: a stampede.

Notes on Reboot9: human?

Reboot9/day0: drunk

First time at Reboot, whose theme this year is "Human?", and very enjoyable. I must admit that I treated it more as a holiday than a conference, and hung out in the sun with people, ate many hotdogs sleeved in baguettes, talked shite, drank beer and fisherman's friends, and swore a lot. There are pictures and drawings.

I turned up slightly traumatised, having not quite finished Cormac McCarthy's harrowing but excellent The Road, a post-apocalyptic, post-humous, post-technology - post-everything - vision of hope, fear and death. Its desolation perhaps influenced me to keep my laptop shut for the three days, and I steered clear of the IM/Jaiku/Twitter background radiation.

Reboot9/day1: anon profile

Notes from some of the talks, my comments in brackets. I'd have to say that there weren't any epiphanic moments for me (possibly because I've been lucky enough to go to the pub many times with several of these presenters in the last year or so), but there was plenty of material to think on.

Tor Nørretranders, keynote

  • Humans are willing to lose money to ensure fairness [this sounded optimistic: I thought there was plenty of research suggesting that we're willing to lose money to ensure that other do worse than us. But I might be wrong.]
  • Emotions more efficient than intelligence [or as the evolutionary psych people might put it: we have stone age brains]
  • People are not things, but flows [cf De Landa]
  • 1.5 tonnes of matter passes through us yearly [Who was it that described humans as a pipe for food/shit/sex with legs attached?]
  • If 98% of our atoms are replaced yearly, then how does this potato remember my childhood?
  • dare/care/share -> attention -> sex, jobs, recognition
  • [there follows a techno-utopian description of a return to nature, "the link age" etc, with a hint of Bruno/Viconian cycling of history, back to the hunter-gatherer mode]
  • [So if he's prescribing that we increase the flow, should we merely eat more, shit more?]

Reboot9/day2: Moleskine spirograph

Adam Arvidsson, Humanism 101 (presentation)

  • philosophically humanism [henceforth H] starts with belief in human agency as distinct from Medieval view of destiny-centred world [he's going at 1,000 mph, must... write... faster...]
  • humans/humanity to be considered different, [apart from nature, god etc]
  • citizens to engage with common cause (res publica)
  • individuals increasingly separated from a becoming distant god, applying reason and industry
  • humans shape world (agency), consciousness shapes humans (Kant's a priori) [and sudden fear-flashback to university]
  • humans qua humans equal; human development is a civ's goal
  • relating to humans as subjects (humans as ends not means)
  • Modern humanism: shape selves through choices; Sartre: existence before essence
  • Empirical anti-H: Freud: ego is not the master - we're not in control of our systems; Marx: humans inside large, uncontrollable structures; Hegel: retrospective [flawed] rationalising; Foucault/Heidegger: man is contingent of/on/from social forces [contrast evol psychology]
  • Moral anti-H: H exerts values upon individual = repressive
  • Postmodern anti-H: [dead white males etc]
  • Eco anti-H: Peter Singer: questions notion that humans should be considered different, in eco context
  • Techno anti-H: infotech/biotech greatly complicates H
  • Religious underpinning: Christ the universalist: "all who believe in me are saved"; fundamental essence/soul
  • "technology is the way (the medium) that Being comes to language" (presents itself) [that's in the manner of Heidegger. Also of Derrida: tech includes language/writing, thus the possibility that language is the way we construct what is real to us]
  • book/print-driven Christianity constructed a view of a rationalised, individualised human
  • H today: "dividuals rather than individuals"; humanity not as a pre-given essence, but as a project/act. Magic/pragmatism. Acting always in conditions of fundamental insecurity [contingency?]
  • thus H as a constructing project, therefore entities with human-ness
  • [with the greatest of love and respect to my friends, I enjoyed this talk the most because it was new. Would love to see it expanded. However, would have also liked to have seen Jeremy Keith's Soul (presentation)]

Reboot9/day1: Aram Bartholl

Aram Bartholl, Online symbols in the offline world

  • Quake boxes in real life are nice. Pixellated. [sandpaper for the eye]
  • first person shooter glasses
  • avatar names hovering above you [the helper ensuring they present correctly to the camera, thus to only one point of view in physical space]
  • random screen pixel display [classic low-tech to simulate high-tech effort, with tea lights lighting and rotating beer can screens]
  • [generally, humorous - projects seem to poke fun at online tropes]

Reboot9/day1: Armitaj

Tom Armitage, Uncanny Valet (presentation)

  • protocols documented [less useful], manners vague [more useful]
  • UIs set precedent behaviourally [interesting; wanted more on this, and how we might deal with disfunctional behaviour!]
  • anthropomorphic representations destroy users' sense of achievement - creepy bellboys [or by babying them]
  • Nass - computers as social actors: people treat computers like people [Pace Nass, in speechrec telephony at Eckoh in 2001-3 we found that users want to know that they're talking to a computer, even if our speech recognition/synthesis was good enough to occasionally pass as human. That uncanny valley again.]
  • 12:00 - Can't set the clock [at this point I am overcome with a vision of Tarmitage as Frank T.J. Mackey. Respect the clock. Tame the cu-, erm, -ltural manners of your app.]
  • breaking frame is rude
  • desktop manners are inappropriate for web
  • tools adaptive [good], services prescriptive [not so good]
  • [some of this stuff seems to build on Webb circa 2005 (no bad thing in my view: building-upon is important), but Tom has taken the material further and presented it well]

Reboot9/day1: Jones

Matt Jones, Travel and serendipity and Dopplr

  • "travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness" - Mark Twain
  • "serendipity is looking in a haystack for a needle and discovering a farmer's daughter"
  • can't automate the future, have to declare it [I want a provision for the fuzziness of the future: I might go here. Probably on those dates. Would go there if X did too.]
  • "While Twitter isn't our particular coral reef [quoting Winer], we are a creature in a hole on a reef" -  Jones [guppies: oh hai]
  • [Matt sounds more Welsh when he talks. In the future, we'll all want to be exotic and Welsh. Q&A very funny. He is a performer.]

Nicolas Nova, Hybridization, fusing, melting, coalescence and salmagundi (presentation)

  • [got the schedule all wrong and missed all of this except...]
  • elevators had a big effect upon the politics of vertical space. The premium space suddenly goes from the bottom to the top of the bldg
  • train schedules and mental models [imagine a heartbeat graph, "value" on the y and time on the x]

Jyri Engestrom, Microblogging

  • a spectrum from beat to hum: beat -> videos, blogs, photos, microblogs, presence -> hum
  • [again, got the schedule all wrong and missed nearly all of this. Possibly due to being fairly sunburnt and dehydrated by this point.]

Marius Watz, Human lessons from generative art

  • [We're looking at Stelarc-style bodymod art pictures whilst nibbling our salmon starter - it's weird]
  • [Some very pretty visuals and animations and technically impressive, but it appears to end at process-as-process and spherical-space-looks-better aesthetics. In addition to the aesthetics-plus-process, I want there to be more ideas or narrative underpinning the project or some context/meaningful design embedded in the aesthetics, because the former seems insufficient - or so I've found in my own art work anyway. Many Rebooters absolutely loved Marius's work.]

Reboot9/day2: glasses of Reboot 2

Sascha Pohflepp, Blinks and buttons

  • Tim Hawkinson, Secret Sync [secret clocks]
  • camera ubiquity [we are a camera]
  • [try polaroid frames on non-polaroid pics]
  • archives of experience, exposed
  • buttons are machine sensors for the human will [nice reversal, see also XXX in Bleecker's talk]
  • Buttons/blind camera gets a picture taken by someone else somewhere else at the same time, but it takes a while to arrive [the received picture as a hyper-invested emotional gift, a souvenir/token, an aide to remembering the moment qua moment]
  • Mediamatic's Katharina showed a phone [when?] that turns to find the nearest, but unidentified, friend
  • [Pohflepp has an aesthetic of hiding the workings, presenting the product/artobject in a retro-futurist design...]

Marko Ahtisaari on Attention (and Blyk)

  • mobile email the most interruptive media (if we're considering how interruptive mobile ads might be) [sadly, he's right: CrackBerries force you to take responsibility for your own actions, how much work and life leak into each other, and many of us find this hard]
  • service marketing: users sharing in the value
  • what takes attention time: clock, text, call
  • Blyk ads will be rich in interaction, not in pixels [understandably vague on biz model details]

Dan Dixon's Quantum Mechanics and Web Design (presentation) I'm very annoyed I missed.

Reboot9/day1: No photos

Julian Bleecker, New Interaction Rituals (presentation)

  • prehistory of the keyboard: Gilbreths (studied bricklayers, trying to mitigate fatigue)
  • Gilbreths' Standard Motions 1919: select, grasp [sounds Heideggery], position, assemble, rest to avoid fatigue, etc
  • Apollo 11: astronauts had minimal screens/keyboards so memorised tasks and the inputs they required [cf ChrisH: more buttons on mobile handsets = more sales. Fact.]
  • Dan O'Sullivan: humans as seen by a computer: an eyeball and two ears for input and fingers [cf Bartholl above, and I am widget, an inadvertent copy]
  • new interaction rituals ... need new computational practices
  • how to "expand" the button gesture?

Manuel Lima, Visual Complexity

  • 31 art projects, 30 transport [toread!]
  • complexity of systems/networks is growing [is it? or is it that we want to map/model more? that we fetishise maps and visualisation?]
  • CIA world factbook [has neat words-on-sticks infovis]

Christian Schade's Posthuman I managed to miss whilst collapsed in the sun. Again.

Reboot9/day2: Lisa Reichelt's hair

Leisa Reichelt, Ambient Intimacy (presentation)

  • cute friendly bee swarms [stinging us with their love, before disappearing forever, leaving us starving and living out McCarthy's The Road]
  • AmbInt messages: background, low intensity, warm, short shelf life, personal
  • who's inside your monkeysphere? [= sphere of multi-dimensional, ie properly meaningful, contacts]
  • exposing more surface area for others to connect with
  • Gregory cartoon: "I had my own blog for a while, but I decided to go back to pointless, incessant barking" [a legion of Rebooters look up from their incessant Jaikuing to laugh. I am cynical aren't I? Did you read this far anyway?] [cf other dog/language: We3 GUD DOG; on the internet no-one knows you're a dog; Vexorg, destroyer of worlds]

Reboot9/day2: Matt gives us homework

Matt Webb, Products are people too, keynote (presentation)

  • [in the Stewart Brand 6-S layers diagram, what do the thickness of line and freq of arrow mean specifically?]
  • perturbation theory - but maybe we can't simply iterate to a solution by starting with utility
  • Vac man [still gets laughs]
  • [It is so hot that Rebooters are dying in their seats - it's a miracle he was able to stay coherent. Too hot to take notes, I stop and just enjoy the S&W flow.]

OK, enough notes: I am but human.

[With edits for clarity and added linky.]

Twitter is all about Maslovian love/belonging (sleep, commuting, lunch, friends)

I'd been grumpily trying to prove that Twitter was only about sleep, lunch and commuting, though at some point I'd left it and moved on to something else, possibly because I needed a kip, a snack or to get back to work. Today, Matt and Foe's pictures of Tweetvolume reminded me of it, and I thought about Maslow's hierarchy of human needs, which contends that "as humans meet basic needs, they seek to satisfy successively higher needs that occupy a set hierarchy".

Sleephomefriendsworkgood2

At the lowest, physiological level, lunch and sleep are big at the time of writing (and I assume that food terms are much bigger in aggregate). At the safety level, home is very popular. At the love/belonging level, friends is monstrous (and interestingly, 5x the size of friend. And I stuck going in there because it seemed to a lower level thing than esteem...) At the esteem level, work is big. At the final self-actualisation level, goodness is all.

Thus we can confidently conclude that Twitter is about social snacking with friends after your taxing commute from work and before having a nice sleep at home. Unsurprisingly for a techno-social tool, its sweet spot is the love/belonging level.

You may be able to come up with better search terms, or frankly disprove this. But it's probably not worth it, because that experiment was un-scientific on so many levels: I did it in five minutes, my terms don't fit Maslow's hierarchy levels well (and the hierarchy itself is questioned by other scholars), and I made sure I drew conclusions to support my original hypothesis. So there.

All Twitter tools and mashups in one place suggests a couple of sites (like TwitterBuzz or http://twitter.isite.net.au) that are working out the most cited terms or links, but I can't get them to work. Perhaps Tweetvolume or Twitter themselves could simply provide a list of the most Twittered terms.