Adam BBMS Journal

In Where the Action Is, Paul Dourish defines social computing and tangible computing as two key threads leading to embodied interaction. Tangible computing refers to integrating physical objects with digital systems, allowing users to interact with technology through natural physical actions. It focues on intuitive, real-world interactions. Social computing, on the other hand, focuses on how social contexts, relationships, and group dynamics shape our interactions with technology. This approach recognizes the social nature of many digital experiences, emphasizing the importance of collaboration, social feedback, and organizational settings in system design. Dourish’s definitions are compelling, especially in today’s day and age where smart objects and collaborative platforms are prominent. Tangible computing aligns with trends like augmented reality, while social computing highlights the importance of understanding human relationships in technological systems. 

The first version of the circuit featured three individual switches, each connected to a speaker. When you pressed a switch, it played a sound at a unique pitch, creating a simple but effective system for producing different tones.  https://vimeo.com/1011063769 Taking the project a step further, the circuit was modified to include a scale-like switch. Instead of pressing a button, this switch activates when a heavy enough weight is placed on it, triggering the sound through the speaker. This added an interesting dynamic, as the pressure-sensitive feature opened up more creative possibilities for interaction with the circuit. For example, playing the sound as a way to notify that something exceeds a weight limit.  https://vimeo.com/1011080755 One way this circuit could've been expanded on is by incorporating more sophisticated sensors and sound manipulation techniques. For instance, we could also have experimented with varying the pitch or duration of the sounds based on the am...

This switch simply indicated that a container of ice breakers is being press down on like a button. The light turning on signifies this. The input of it being pressed down or not relates to the light being turned on or off, respectively.

Crawford’s idea of interaction as a back-and-forth process, where two actors take turns listening, thinking, and responding, highlights the need for active participation. I see interactivity as a dynamic relationship, where each participant affects and is affected by the other. It's not just about responding but about shaping the experience together. This idea captures the essence of real conversation and engagement, whether between people or with technology. I agree with Crawford’s definition, especially his distinction between interaction and reaction. True interaction requires both sides to actively contribute, rather than one simply reacting to the other. Without mutual engagement, the experience becomes one-sided, limiting the potential for deeper understanding or creativity. For example, if one person in a conversation is just nodding without processing the other’s ideas, the conversation loses its depth and flow. It’s helpful to have different ways of explaining how things w...