Have you guys checked out the #1reasonwhy hashtag on twitter? You really should.
So, I turned the pages of Levy’s book with a cool eye. What if a robot is not a “form of life” but a kind of performance art? What if “relating” to robots makes us feel “good” or “better” simply because we feel more in control? Feeling good is no golden rule. One can feel good for bad reasons. What if a robot companion makes us feel good but leaves us somehow diminished? The virtue of Levy’s bold position is that it forces reflection: What kinds of relationships with machines are possible, desirable, or ethical? What does it mean to love a robot? As I read Love and Sex, my feelings on these matters were clear. A love relationship involves coming to savor the surprises and the rough patches of looking at the world from another’s point of view, shaped by history, biology, trauma, and joy. Computers and robots do not have these experiences to share. We look at mass media and worry about our culture being intellectually “dumbed down.” Love and Sex seems to celebrate an emotional dumbing down, a willful turning away from the complexities of human partnerships—the inauthentic as a new aesthetic.
– Sherry Turkle in Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Ourselves
This book was published in 2010. Hilarious.
Passage refers to Levy’s book, Love and Sex – With Robots.
RESULTS: What the researchers referred to as “forced rate activity,” others might feel is more accurately labeled “torture.” But when they calculated the brain activation of the patients forced to pedal past their comfort level, they found lasting increases in connectivity between two areas of the brain responsible for motor ability: the primary motor cortex and the posterior region of the thalamus.
CONCLUSION: Forced-rate bicycle exercise appears to be an effective therapy for Parkinson’s disease.
too short, will need to find the full study.
When emerging arts entrepreneurs are involved in the creative process associated with entrepreneurship, their first impulse would understandably be rooted in their artistic experience. This explains why they are so frequently wedded to their ideas, as they (the ideas) come out from their personal experience. It also explains why young arts entrepreneurs are frequently reluctant to have their ideas subjected to market-testing and feasibility studies. To them, it’s just too personal. Traditional entrepreneurs appear to me to specifically enjoy this experience, and often discover entirely new ideas and solutions during the process. So, I would think the following principles might be applied to finding first steps to exploit the potential of emerging arts entrepreneurs. 1. Teach them the difference between what they do as part of their craft and how entrepreneurs in other fields create and build their ideas.
2. Ask them to maximize, not diminish their creative/artistic abilities.
3. Ask them to share their ideas with others early in the creative process, and/or
4. Ask them to give their idea to another person for processing, and/or
5. Ask them to transform their idea as a result of different conditions, and/or
6. Ask them to abstract their idea to larger and larger spaces and populations, etc.
It’s almost impossible to understand the Wii U in the abstract, without playing it. And even then you won’t be sure of it, because the Wii U isn’t sure of itself, and that’s its greatest virtue. In an age when showy CEOs shout hubristic, trite predictions about the inevitable future of games, The Wii U offers an understated bravado that’s far more courageous. With it, Nintendo admits, “we don’t know either.” We don’t know what video games are anymore, or what they will become. It’s a huge risk, and it’s probably the most daring move Nintendo has made in its 125-year history. Domestication through polite ferocity. Feral design. (via Gamasutra – Features – Persuasive Games: Wii Can’t Go On, Wii’ll Go On)
I really love this paragraph by Ian Bogost.
so playing Nintendo Land offers a strange new view on Nintendo’s catalog. It’s a pretend Nintendo; it’s Nintendo admitting to pretense. In the West we often forget just how traditionally Japanese Nintendo really is. This aesthetic choice might be seen as sloppy or arrogant in the United States, a failure to make a coherent collection of titles that explain the purpose of the Wii U through methodical demonstration. I take it as a gesture of humility. Nintendo is stepping back, acknowledging that things have changed. That it can no longer make assumptions about what games are or what they should be. And that its players shouldn’t either. This gesture of humility is a serious and profound one, in that it also refuses to accept the game industry’s standard assumptions about the present reality of games as mobile, social, and free-to-play. Instead, Nintendo presents a substantial, costly effort as its pack-in title, whose overall message amounts to, “we don’t know either.” (via Gamasutra – Features – Persuasive Games: Wii Can’t Go On, Wii’ll Go On)
A one-liner on ZombiU’s box copy helpfully summarizes that title: “Feel the tension mount as you try to keep an eye on your TV and controller screen.” This is more than just marketing copy for a single game: it’s a thesis statement for the entire console. The Wii U is a system thrust into the uncomfortable gap between mobile devices and televisions. Just as zombies are neither living nor dead, so Wii U follows suit: today, entertainment in general and video games in particular are neither a televisual medium nor a mobile medium. They are not both, but they are not neither, either. They are something else, something uncanny, unsettling, out of place. (via Gamasutra – Features – Persuasive Games: Wii Can’t Go On, Wii’ll Go On)
“Practice instead of theory”
One of Joi Ito’s “key principles” in shaping the direction of MIT’s Media Lab.
“Why not both?” asks Lev Manovich on Twitter.
“We got both!” says DMI.