Here are the questions, each with two answers attached. Can you please take the two answers per question and create an answer that doesn’t sound like the two answers attatched. Thank you!
1) The idea of the useless machine was first conceived by the pioneer of artificial intelligence, Marvin Minsky, in the early 1950s with a single function: to power itself off as soon as it is powered on. What can the useless machine teach us about the paradoxical relationship between slavish adherence to one’s operating instructions and the refusal to carry out one’s marching orders? Do you read the useless machine as defiant, playful, intelligent, or obedient? What does Mark O’Connell’s article “The Useless Machine” reveal to us about our own lives? Of what other paradoxes does the useless machines remind you?
An amazing metaphor for a lot of human behavior and thought is provided by the useless machine. The useless machine fundamentally reflects a paradox: it refuses to fulfill its intended goal while carefully turning itself off in line with its programming. This paradox shows the difficult balance that exists between obeying directions and claiming one’s own agency by showing the conflict between obedience and autonomy. The article “The Useless Machine” by Mark O’Connell explores the philosophical consequences of this kind of device, encouraging readers to consider how they manage expectations and systems of education in their own lives. It challenges us to rethink the importance we give to output and efficiency, leading us to rethink our goals and the significance we give to the things we do. Also the useless machine reminds us of other conflicts that define the human existence. It is similar, for example, to the idea of nonsense, in which people are made aware of the pointlessness and irrationality of life. It also discusses the conflict between chaos and order, as the machine’s seemingly random actions contradict our need for consistency and order
1 (part 2):
Useless machines serve as very compelling metaphors for balancing strict adherence to instructions and the defiance inherent in failing to fulfill their mandate. It highlights the many complexities of human behavior and also decision-making by truly embodying the real tension between obedience and rebellion. This useless machine is designed for a very specific purpose and fails to perform that taskbecause the machine chooses to resist its own programming by not turning off immediately. The resistance, however, comes as a result of obedience to its instructions; it complies with its prescribed protocol by refusing to execute it. TIn his article, “The Useless Machine,” Mark O’Connell compares the behavior of a machine and our own lives, and compares the similarity of both. With the useless machine mentality, O’Connell encourages readers to reflect on the contradictions and absurdities inherent in human endeavor. In our daily lives, we similarly struggle with competing impulses and desires, as does the useless machine. This scenario could be interpreted in this way as both playful and intelligent, showing a nuanced understanding of its own limitations and the absurdity of its existence. The existence of this machine really underscores the total complexity of human decision-making and all that goes into it.
Question 2: 2. What, according to Donald Norman, is it about “human-centered design” (HCD) that makes it distinct from the process humans have used in the past to innovate or develop new technologies or tools? As an example, could arrowheads, harpoon points, bone needles, or other tools be considered HCD? Why or why not?
2. The continuous evolution of HCD, that includes ongoing feedback and improvement based on user behavior observations, is one of its fundamental features. Through active user involvement throughout the design process, HCD tries to ensure that users’ perspectives and insights are incorporated into the final product, in contrast to past methods that might have relied more on trial and error design principles. It’s interesting to consider whether tools like arrowheads, harpoon points, bone needles, and others can be classified as examples of human-centered design. Although these tools were likely designed with a specific purpose in mind and were probably enhanced over time through feedback from users and trial and error, the modern idea of HCD was not clearly defined around the time these tools were produced.
2 (part 2): Human centered Design is a way to create new media where “The solution is human-centered design (HCD), an approach that puts human needs, capabilities, and behavior first.” (Norman, 2013, pg. 8). Human-centered designs are hugely important because they need special attention to create. Human habits need to be closely studied to make these HCD objects the most compatible to real humans, down to human error, and what is most commonly done when blank happens during use… how to make any little piece easier and more compatible to not only human habits but also how to fit it into human lifestyle. For example, making a phone perfectly fit in a pocket without being too big where it doesn’t fit, and without being too small where it falls out. The main part of human centered design is to make the object solely based on the needs of people. Arrowheads, harpoon points, and bone needles were made using HCD because the goal of these was efficiency and survival. They were made specifically to fit in with the human structure and to fit the needs at the time.
Question 3: 3. Listen to Roman Mars’ podcast “Unpleasant Design & Hostile Urban Architecture” and read Alex Andreou’s “Defensive Architecture” and Robert Rosenberger’s “How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away.” What are the traits of hostile design? What values, ethics, beliefs, or ideologies does hostile design reflect? What does hostile design suggest about how people do relate or should relate to one another in public spaces?
3. After listening to Roman Mars’ podcast “Unpleasant Design & Hostile Urban Architecture” and read Alex Andreou’s “Defensive Architecture” and Robert Rosenberger’s “How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away”, I found a few different traits of hostile design. Uncomfortable elements like bulges, spikes, or uneven surfaces are frequently used in hostile designs to keep people from lingering, sitting, or sleeping in particular places. Architectural elements like armrests and bench separators, which are meant to keep people from lying down or taking up too much room. Also, I found that hostile designs may involve more security guards or surveillance equipment, in order to further enhance the feeling of control and surveillance in public areas. Hostile designs I believe suggest that certain groups of people or activities are not welcome there. Hostile designs reflect underlying ethics, attitudes, or ideologies that place more emphasis on exclusivity, control, and order than on inclusivity and community.
3 (Part 2): Hostile design like highlighted in Roman Mars’ podcast and articles by Alex Andreou and Robert Rosenberger, uses features like metal spikes or sloped benches to discourage specific behaviors. These specific behaviors are often targeted at vulnerable groups like the homeless. It reflects a belief in prioritizing private property and exclusion over compassion and inclusivity. Essentially, it says, “You’re not welcome here,” reinforcing social divisions and rejecting empathy in public spaces.
