SpacePlace

Googleplex space redesign

Metropolis last issue has a very inspiring description of how New York workplace consultant DEGW and the L.A.-based design firm Clive Wilkinson Architects reexamined and redesigned the Googleplex. The article also describes how Google mix of openness and control is their office space.

Page and Brin were less interested in the aesthetics of the space than in circulation and flow (...) ...a typology of work spaces that Wilkinson's office developed. "We tried to create a whole variety of experiences," Rappaport says. After examining the ways that employees actually used their space, the architects came up with a list of 13 different zones and arranged them from hot ("clubhouse": pool table and lounge area) to cold (closed workrooms), depending on the level of interaction they encourage. Each floor of the building was divided into five or six flexible neighborhoods separated by "landmarks," the shared public spaces that are the center of Google life. There are kitchens full of snacks, lounges with pool tables and comfortable seating, and libraries of stacked plywood box shelves filled with books and games that Googlers have brought in from home and based on, Wilkinson says, "the idea of the village library as the repository of thought." On either end of the floor is a structure that looks like a cross between a tree house and a guard tower, used for meetings and offices. In the center atrium, overlooking the grand staircase, is a group of larger, more luxurious meeting rooms. Other small meeting rooms take the shape of yurts--another Wilkinson creation--which look like little padded igloos and are easily assembled or torn down.

The solution de resistance, though, is the glass tents. Page and Brin knew their engineers needed quiet to concentrate on programming, yet the company was also dedicated to packing three or four people into an office, a configuration that the cofounders liked from their Stanford grad-school days. They wanted to achieve that without resorting to an impersonal warren of cubicles or a hierarchical system of corner offices, which would have belied their mostly flat management structure. Despite the priority on concentration, face time is valued, along with the sort of serendipitous encounters that might stimulate new ideas between engineers not working closely together.

Why do I blog this? I am interested in how space (as a whole) affords, structure, reshape socio-cognitive practices and collaboration (it's one of the broad topic of my research in both physical and virtual world). The paper is very pertinent when it comes to describing the user acceptance of space design and how it evolved over time at Google.

New sort of places: googleplexes

It's always curious to read about new sort of places created by networked technologies. The NYT has a good piece about the next to be Googleplex (a portmanteau of Google and complex — in the architectural sense) that will be located surrounding the Columbia along the Oregon-Washington border (a big operational infrastructure).

On the banks of the windswept Columbia River, Google is working on a secret weapon in its quest to dominate the next generation of Internet computing (...) The complex, sprawling like an information-age factory, heralds a substantial expansion of a worldwide computing network handling billions of search queries a day and a growing repertory of other Internet services. (...) But Google Earth, the satellite mapping service, like its rivals, so far shows the 30-acre parcel here quite undeveloped.

(Picture by Melanie Conner for The New York Time)

Look at the characteristics of such a place:

Behind the curtain of secrecy, the two buildings here — and a third that Google has a permit to build — will probably house tens of thousands of inexpensive processors and disks, held together with Velcro tape in a Google practice that makes for easy swapping of components. The cooling plants are essential because of the searing heat produced by so much computing power.

The complex will tap into the region's large surplus of fiber optic networking, a legacy of the dot-com boom.

Why do I blog this? from my standpoint, it's interesting to see that such a landmark IS actually one the node that AFFORDS our practices (searching, navigating in data/information).

The context of a display ecology

In Displays in the Wild: Understanding the Dynamics andEvolution of a Display Ecology, Elaine M. Huang, Elizabeth D. Mynatt, Jay P. Trimble is an in-depth field evaluation of large interactive displays; it exemplifies the "context of a display ecology".

It's a study about large interactive displays within a multi-display work environment used in the NASA Mars Exploration Rover (MER) missions, used in a complex and ecologically valid setting. What is interesting, is the lessons learned from this experiment:

the “success” of a large interactive display within a display ecology cannot be measured by whether a steady state of use is reached. Because people appropriate these tools as necessary when tasks and collaborations require them, there may be a natural ebb and flow of use that does not correspond to success or failure, but rather to the dynamic nature of collaborative work processes. Success is therefore better evaluated by examining the ease and extent of support that such displays provide when tasks call for a shared visual display or interactive work surface. (...) Another important lesson regarding the value of large displays in work environments came from our observation of the interplay between interactive use and ambient information display. In the realm of large interactive display research, a decrease in interactivity is often viewed as a failure of the system to support workgroup practices. We observed a migration from interactive use to ambient information display, and through our interviews discovered how valuable this ambient information was. (...) in the greater context of a display ecology, it is misleading to evaluate the isolated use of a single system; the existence of other displays in the environment means that it is important to understand how the ecology functions as a whole, not just how individual displays are used.

Why do I blog this? I found this paper interesting because it describes how people made use of such a display; the highlights researchers brought forward also show pertinent issues in the domain of ambient/interactive furnitures, which could be helpful for some of our projects at the lab.

When location information undermines navigation

Does Location Come for Free?The Effects of Navigation Aids on Location Learning by Carl Gutwin and Diana Anton; Technical report HCI-TR-06-03.

Navigation aids such as bookmarks, target prediction, or history mechanisms help users find desired objects in visual workspaces. They work by highlighting objects that may be important, and they can improve performance in spaces where the territory is not well known. However, by making navigation easier, they may also hinder acquisition of a mental map of the space, reducing navigation performance when the navigation aid is not available. We carried out a study to determine the effects of three different types of navigation aids on spatial location learning. We found that after training with a navigation aid, there was no reduction in performance when the aid was removed. Even with training interfaces that made the task significantly easier, people learned the locations as well as those who had no aid at all in training. These results suggest that designers can use navigation aids to assist inexperienced users, without compromising the eventual acquisition of a spatial map.

Why do I blog this? this is interesting to my research since I also encounters similar results: by providing different location information, there was some undermining results concerning, not navigation, but collaborative partners' navigation memory. And this, with a very different setting since it was pervasive computing.

User experience of Community Displays

"Understanding and Designing for the Voluntary Adoption of Community Displays" by Harry Brignull is a very relevant thesis that deals with large digital wall display system for the support of informal social interaction in communal spaces.

One of the contributions of this thesis is a critical analysis of research studies revealing two distinct categories of Community Display settings: ‘one shot’ usage settings and ‘on-going’ usage settings. ‘One shot’ usage settings include one-off social events, conferences (McCarthy, 2003) and festivals (Agamanolis, 2003). (...) ‘On-going’ settings, on the other hand include common rooms (Houde et al, 1998), cafés (Churchill et al, 2003), and relaxation areas (Grasso, 2003), and are used regularly by an established community over a period of months or years.

Findings show that that the spatial distribution of interaction around a Community Display is of crucial importance to understanding its usage and adoption. The concept of ‘flow’ is introduced to describe the manner in which users move through space; and the concept of a ‘honey pot’ is introduced to describe the public interaction space around a community display which users are attracted to and congregate in because of the resources it offers. The public availability of interaction with a Community Display is found to be important in that it allows others to ‘oversee’ interaction while going about other things (Heath and Luff, 1991), creating opportunities for them to join in, and thus facilitating spontaneous social congregations. This overseeing is also found to be crucial to the learning process - studies carried out show that people predominantly learned about Community Displays by observing others using them, i.e. vicariously.

Why do I blog this? I am interested in how interaction could be spatially distributed and how potential users could apprehend such artefacts because it relates with my research about the impacts of technologies on space and place.

Neverending drawing

(Via), this Neverending Drawing project (by Oskar Karlin) is very neat:

Never ending drawing is a project I started in Stockholm five years ago. Inspired by Douglas Coupland’s book Microserfs, Paul Auster’s New York Trilogy and some drawings made by my sister I started mapping my movements in the city. I downloaded a map over Stockholm and pasted it into Illustrator and drew my movents in separate layers each day. After two years I moved to Berlin and then London and continued the project there. Earlier this year during a trip I also mapped my movements in Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York.

My limitations are a defined area around the central parts of the city I am in. So if I go outside the “borders” I don’t map it out. You could call it vacation. Since all the data is stored in vector format it is easy to work with.

An example: on the left is is Stockholm, Berlin and London on top of each other, and on the right, it's basically the same as but instead of outlinesKarlin have filled each day with a color with low transparency(Stockholm is green, Berlin is red and London is blue).

Why do I blog this? I like this sort of visualization/city mapping; the chaos created is intriguing and quite situationist. Overlaps are pertinent, maybe this is an instantiation of the Global City.

Account from the Metaverse Summit

News.com has a great account of the Metaverse Summit, which was about how video game design, geospatial engineering, high-tech research, software development, social networking, telecommunications would reshape the virtual world (or the overlap between the physical and the real world). The outcome they highlight is that "agreement about the metaverse of 2016 was hard to find", which is of course interesting to me. Here are some trends they discuss:

"I thought we were going to focus a bit more on virtual worlds because when I hear the term metaverse, I hear 3D virtual worlds. And we ended up talking about virtual worlds as well as augmented reality, which to me is kind of separate technology in its vision," Moore said [PARC] (...) One of the questions asked most frequently throughout the event was whether an overriding metaverse of 2016 will be commercially owned or open source. There was little agreement about that, but it was clear that the companies seen as most likely to provide the tools for a single metaverse upon which many 3D, social applications could be built are Microsoft and Google.

In part, Google was seen as more likely because of its development of Google Earth and its recent purchase of the maker of the 3D modeling software, Sketchup. (...) In addition, there was a general consensus that--as mobile devices become more sophisticated--the 3D Web would become much more the province of such devices and far less of the kinds of desktop or laptop computers we know today.

A public document that would wrap up this will be published by the end of the summer. Why do I blog this? I am interested (from my research perspective) about how technology reshape spatial practices.

Rant against 3D

At the Metaverse conference ("Pathways to the 3D Web"), it seems that there were some good discussions about errors of the past concerning the overemphasis on 3D as the solution for moving beyond the current interfaces. Here is what Randy (from the Habitat weblog) says about this:

3-D isn't an interface paradigm. 3-D isn't a world model. 3-D isn't the missing ingredient. 3-D isn't an inherently better representation for every purpose. 3-D is an attribute, like the color blue. Any time you read or hear about how great 3-D is and how it's going to change everything about computers and services, substitute the word blue for 3-D.

Don't get me wrong; there are great applications for 3D. That's not the point. The point is that idealistic assumptions and techno-optimism are no substitute for understanding what people actually want and do when they interact with each other, whether via computers or in the physical world.

Let's not repeat the path VRML took - that'd be a double waste and I won't do it. Let's figure out the problem first, and then look to see if a global-shared-3d-standard-UI-identity-object-system is the solution. So far, I haven't found a single one.

Why do I blog this? I am concerned by people's interaction in space/place (be it physical or virtual) and my feeling is that there is always on overemphasis on 3D. Yesterday it was on the web: having boring 3D libraries to pick up books instead than having a amazon-based interface. Today, it's on cell phones, people design 3D application on tiny cell phones screen; I don't really see the point in that. There is clearly an overemphasis about reproducing spatial topographies in 3D, which is not systematically pertinent for interactions. The point is not to have the same structure but more to have a common "place": a virtual location that affords specific interactions.

And of course, this should not undermine the value of 3D, MMORPG clearly shows that they are pertinent and meaningful.

Metaverse Roadmap: pathways to the 3D web

The Metaverse Roadmap is a ten-year forecast and visioning survey of 3D Web technologies, applications, markets, and potential social impacts.

What happens when video games meet Web 2.0? When virtual worlds meet geospatial maps of the planet? When simulations get real and life and business go virtual? When your avatar becomes your blog, your desktop, and your online agent? What happens is the metaverse. (...) Areas of exploration include the convergence of Web applications with networked computer games and virtual worlds, the use of 3D creation and animation tools in virtual environments, digital mapping, artificial life, and the underlying trends in hardware, software, connectivity, business innovation and social adoption that will drive the transformation of the World Wide Web in the coming decade.

The MVR is organized by the Acceleration Studies Foundation, a nonprofit research group, and supported by a growing team of industry and institutional partners, all pioneers in this important space.

So check out:

Creation of the Roadmap begins with an invitational Metaverse Roadmap Summit May 5-6 2006 at SRI International where a diverse group of industry leaders, technologists, analysts, and creatives will outline key visions, scenarios, forecasts, plans, opportunities, uncertainties, and challenges ahead. Below are a few distinguished attendees. Click 'view all participants' for the full list

The first steps of the roadmap 2016 is presented here

Why do I blog this? This is helpful for my foresight research about video-games.

Special issue of Psychnology about Mobile Media

The Psychnology journal (an online research journal) is going to have a special issue on Mobile media and communication – reconfiguring human experience and social practices? (edited by Ilkka Arminen):

Mobile media have already become an essential aspect of everyday life. They alter existing communication patterns, enable new kinds of contacts between people, and yet remain embedded in prevailing social relations and practices. Mobile communication has said to have created “timeless time” and freedom from place. This new social and communicative development has been characterized revolutionary. Still, the usages of mobile technologies are solidly anchored on local circumstances and prevailing forms of life. Also not all mobile technologies have proven successful. The adoption of mobile media has been in many respects much slower than anticipated. Is there a contradiction between revolutionary technological potential of mobile media and embodied, habitual human experiences? This special issue addresses the potentially tense relationship between the development of mobile technologies and mundane experience.

Possible topics include:

Reinvention of mobile media.

Limits of mobile technologies.

Mobile technologies and local realities.

Mobile technologies and new forms of social interaction.

Mobile technologies and social networks.

Submissions are accepted of any length, discipline and format provided their scientific relevance and accuracy. They should be sent in electronic form to both: articles(at)psychnology.org, and Ilkka.Arminen(at)uta.fi no later than October, 30 2006. Inclusion of color pictures, videos and sound files is welcome.

Why do I blog this? again this is indirectly connected to my research about how new technologies reshape social/cultural/cognitive practices.

Workshop about space/place

In the context of the Participatory Design Conference, there is a workshop about place, space, and design (.pdf).

While we are "Expanding Boundaries in Design", perhaps we should think for a moment on the significance of boundaries, which are essentially the separation of "this place" from everything "not this place". And what constitutes "this place"?

The intent of this workshop is to bring together researchers and practitioners who have studied place and space and are engaged in exploring the ways in which place and space affect design and the use of technology and the ways in which technology changes the places where it is used.

The day of the workshop will be divided between exercises and discussions. It will begin with a brief round of introductions, followed by an exercise on location. This is intended to explore differences in awareness of location and the differential meanings carried by the respective erminologies of place and space. The next segment will be the presentation and discussion of participants' reports on their own studies of place and space, either sent in advance or brought to the workshop. The morning will conclude with a game on place, space, and design.

Why do I blog this? This is related to my PhD research, especially the relationship between space/place and socio-cognitive interactions with regards to pervasive computing applications.

Palo Alto in 2006

Two interesting signs. One the left, the company indicates its own subsidiaries, which is often done by luxury companies (like Louis Vuitton indicating the glamorous places where they are like Paris, Tokyo, Cannes...), the streetwear company (LA, Tokyo...) and now the tech ones who not only put the SVs references but also subsidiaries in India. On the right, it's just company plates printed in the rush on A4 papers, web2.0 frenziness? Look at the cities New ones

Why do I blog this? just few thoughts while walking in downtown Palo Alto this morning.

3D Level design history

There is a good serie of columns on Gamasutra lately about level design by Sam Shahrani. It focused on FPS and 3D level design. What is good is that it gives a comprehensive overview of the different techniques used so far. Some very relevant excerpts about how level designers takes advantage of constraints to create spatial affordances that would support the game scenario and gameplay:

Level designers, or map designers, are the individuals responsible for constructing the game spaces in which the player competes. (...) The level design for Battlezone was relatively straightforward, in as much as it consisted of creating a game space (the “large valley surrounded by mountains”) in which the player could drive around and destroy targets for points. Essentially, the level design was that of a digital Roman arena, wherein the player could do battle, and it was a design that worked well for the limitations of the graphics engine, and provided enjoyable and novel gameplay for the arcade and home computer markets. (...) Not all attempts at 3D games involved the use of polygon-based 3D environments like those used in Battlezone; several games attempted to leverage other technology to provide an impression of a three-dimensional world. Notable efforts include Lucasfilm Games, now LucasArts, 1986 title Rescue on Fractalus!, a first-person title that used fractal generation technology to render the game world. (...) [Then in 3D FPS like Wolfenstein 3D]The emphasis on speed, however, again led to limitations on how detailed the world was. Interactivity in Wolf3D was relatively limited, with the player having only two ways to interact with the world; shooting things to kill them and opening doors by pressing the spacebar, a universal “use” key. Wolf3D upped the ante, though, by adding in “push walls”. These walls appeared like any of the normal solid walls in the game, but if a user hit the spacebar in front of them, the wall would slowly slide back, revealing a hidden room (Kushner, 108). Hidden rooms and secret levels would play a major part in future id games, and First-Person Shooters in general. The push walls were another innovation by Tom Hall, who served as the director of Wolfenstein 3D (Kushner, 108-112), and served to reward the player for thoroughly exploring the game world. It was an interesting gameplay mechanic, and one that grew out of a tradition in the video game industry for including secrets, or “Easter eggs” for players to find (Kent 188-189). While many would consider these “Easter eggs” to be afterthoughts, they present an important opportunity for level designers to maximize player investment and interest in the game world. (...) Doom fundamentally altered the First-Person Shooter genre (...) The Doom engine supported a number of new features that finally made realistic and interactive environments possible. Instead of merely featuring doors that could be opened, Doom featured the ability to alter the game world by using in-game switches and “triggers” to activate events. These events could range from a set of stairs rising out of the ground to unsealing a room full of ravenous near-invisible monsters to bridges emerging out of toxic slime. Additionally, Doom added in lifts, which could raise players to different levels inside the game world or, if used slightly differently, could act as pistons and crush players against a ceiling. Further, the Doom engine’s support of variable height floors and ceilings also meant that in addition to being able to move on all three axes, more complex architecture could also be created. Tables, altars, platforms, low hallways, ascending and descending stairs, spacious caverns and other objects could all be created using geometry. The ability to trigger events that could release monsters or alter geometry led level designers to create a number of surprisingly complex traps for players to uncover as they played through the game, from rapidly rising floors to bridges that would sink into toxic sludge if players moved too slowly. (...) In addition to architectural advances, Doom also added the ability to alter the light levels in a level. (...) The level designs for Doom were accomplished using much more advanced tools than previous id titles. Romero wrote an engine-specific level editing program called DoomEd (...) Doom also illustrates that levels do not have to be based on easily recognizable locations in order for players to enjoy them, nor do they have to conform to preconceptions of what an environment should look like.

An important concept is also this idea "Doom defined the first person genre, but more importantly it made the idea of users modifying a commercial title acceptable to developers.": the level design is the cornerstone of bottom-up innovation in the game world: through modding, end-user manage to create their own version what would be the world they want to play in.

Why do I blog this? What's explained here is of tremendous importance for the comprehension of spatial practices in virtual worlds. The author of this piece is Sam Shahrani, an M.A. candidate at Indiana University in the Master’s in Immersive Mediated Environments program through the Department of Telecommunications. He's making an incredible job explaining level design from the game developers' perspective. I am looking forward reading his dissertation.

It's certainly the most interesting piece about spatiality in video games I've read in the last few months.

Place panel at the netpublics

The other day, preparing the "place" planel at the networked publics conference, Kazys Varnelis sent us (panelists) a list of questions that we would discuss. I just pasted them there with some the answers I thought about during a jetlagged night. It's messy of course:

1. What are three ways in which pervasive networks refashion our relationships to place?

  • a new layer of information and communication is present -> I am here and not here, I am aware of what is going on here + what is going on at OTHER locations. This is both interesting from the social point of view (being in contact) but detrimental from the cognitive point of view (partial attention to the environment/people...) -> simultaneous environment -> adam says yes simultaneity but where are the real emotions?
  • the definition of a place is also altered. place = a part of space with some social and cultural framing (waiting room, café, library...) -> now it's more than that: different roles at the same time, which might lead to different acceptations (people don't have the same expectations about what is acceptable, doable at at a certain place). +distinction private/public space is blurred too. But at the same time, new types of places emerges: tech hotels, cybercafé and we're not always aware of them: amazon warehouse, servers farms as showed jeffrey huang at lift. new markets = you can adjust the price by checking on the internet (india) + work everywhere
  • eventually this may also make some private or semi-private information public: if I can know familiar strangers, or who is interested by what with my PDA... information about oneself can also be accessible everywhere by us BUT also by others: HOW can we escape from that: will there be places I don't want to go because of that?
  • 2. Speculate on how networks that pervade physical space might knit together in differentiated ways our relationships to our social Networks.

    it might make people aware of certain things... only if they pay attention to it...

    3. What kinds of social interaction rituals are distinguished or made possible by the existence of digital networked publics?

    • permanent connection to the social network leads to the fact that some rituals disappears (I don't say hello to some folks anymore, I am always in contact with them in my buddy list+sms)
    • the sharing / exchange / spread of memes, url, cultural content which is INTENTIONAL: I give you this because I infer that you might be interested in it (funny / useful for your job/hobby); "the gift" (marcel mauss): the object that is given bears the identity of the giver. When the recipient receives the gift, they not only receive the object, but the association of that object with the identity of the giver + parties to a relationship of gift exchange are obligated to give gifts, to receive them and to repay them in the appropriate ways.
    • distant people are aware of what their social network does/did; when people have offline discussion, people refer to what happened "on the internet"
    • 4. Are RFIDs revolutionary or merely glorified ID tags?

      they are promising: - it's still yet another card - especially if everybody can have a reader (cell phones)

      the RFID washer: jammer is more promising to me

      5. What are some pedestrian instances of how networked publics matter vis-a-vis space and place?

      some navigation systems (gps but I don't really believe in that), urban information display (bus, metro, train, interoperability of schedule, reported to the public)

      more interesting to me: GAMES: location-based games, mobile games, alternative reality games because it reshapes the way we leave the city (dérive/drift), can help discovering new things about the city

      6. What about our need to escape from the net?

      more important then ever, a crux issue especially from the cognitive point of view (too much information, cognitive overload, partial attention)

      "cold spots" - electronic ghetto: for poors -> mike davis (blog) - for the rich who can manage to escape from the net and who knows that they should do it: they are "netless" literate)

      7. What is our relationship to place when we use devices that network us while we are moving (walking or driving) versus those that connect us to a network while we are relatively immobile? That is, has our sense of place become as fluid and mobile as our relation to the network?

      the attention is different, cognitely speaking for instance I am lost in a city and very hurried I won't look at my gps phone but ask someone our attention is still limited anyway the device engages us with the place to a certain extent

      8. More and more of the devices which network us are screen-based, with some visual display and an input device of keyboard, touch pad or touch screen? What do you think are the key reasons for the intransigence of the screen in our social practices of interaction?

      that's a pity and I don't like that, my favorite mobile game device would have no screen we're fed up with screens but currently there are some tech limits, especially in cell phones regarding the massive development of applications that would use lbs, voice or tangible interaction, the industry goes where it's easier: developing on-screen applocations.

      but ringtones + the way people personalize their cell phones shows that there is a need to go beyond the screen!

      the other problem is that the screen is the standard, the dominant design and it's hard to engage users (I mean ALL users, not just early adopters) in other interactions

      9. VRML blew it. Will there be a successor spatiality to HTML?

      of course there are stuff like that, especially in the GIS world + also in the open cartography community

      there are already few instances: annotating space with metadata; about building semantic models of places; about exchanging geospatial data in RDF, what Jo Walsh does a simple vocabulary for describing physical spaces and the connections between them

      there is also PML: Psychogeographical Markup Language: PML is a unified system to capture meaningful psychogeographical [meta]data about spaces which can be used to compose psychogeograms: diagrammatic representations of psychogeographically experienced space.

      10. Are MMORPGs just glorified MUDs? Or do they really portend a new spatiality?

      there's indeed a big debate about it raph koster talked about that http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/03/31/are-muds-and-mmorpgs-the-same-thing/ graphics are not always more immersive (uncanny valley!) the level of information available is hugely more important in MMORPG

      YES NEW spatiality in terms of spatiality, the physical representation can create local affordances (topology) but the main change is that there is an isomorphic representation of the character to the player: it's not textual: then there could be Proxemics issue (Philip Jeffrey's study), you can also follow eye gaze: COPRESENCE AFFORDANCES are very present in MMORPG and different than in MUD (it was more explicit: you had to type: look at XXX)

      11. How will space and architecture deform in connection to place? Will cities transform radically as they did during the development of modernity?

      the end of cheap oil may be a more radical change but as jeffrey huang said there are new places + electronic ghettos + disconnected ghettos for the rich

      13. Is our culture of connectivity also a culture of disconnectivity? How much is the real world losing to the virtual? Is it?

      THERE should absolutely be a culture of disconnectivity: 1) the systems are not semafuls, people should be aware of that, to deal with uncertainty, discrepancies (fabien's thesis) 2) people should understand the value of being disconnected

      14. What is more important today, the visible or the invisible? What is their relationship?

      the articulation of both the advent of virtual space made think that the invisible was important but it's not true

      15. What is the future of place?

      more variety, more intricacies (a place is not just a café: it's a café+ meeting room + working place...)

      and those who will make the changes possible are not the one you expect: JC Decaux, bathroom facilities (geberit)... they are ubiquitous and want to take advantage of that

Google and pop 3D software

It seems that Google recently bought sketchup, a simple 3D modeling program:

Google SketchUp (free) is an easy-to-learn 3D modeling program that enables you to explore the world in 3D. With just a few simple tools, you can create 3D models of houses, sheds, decks, home additions, woodworking projects - even space ships. And once you've built your models, you can place them in Google Earth, post them to the 3D Warehouse, or print hard copies.

For instance, here is the University of Southern California (USC) Tower:

Then it's of course possible to search, store/share those models here.

Why do I blog this? with Second Life, there seems to be a good trend towards this modeling thing. Clickable Culture has a good point about Second Life as a production tool: using the World Wide Web as a 3D design platform. I found intriguing the way virtual space and the real world can be intertwined by such practices.

Being in LA

I'm currently in Los Angeles for few things: participating to the "place" planel of the network publics conference, visiting my friend Julian Bleecker's lab and preparing the follow-up of our blogject project.

LA trip Empty sidewalk Los Angeles Music Center  (3) Complex trick to hold the charger

Apart from watching empty streets with huge-sidewalks, frank gehry architecture, I spend today visiting the Annenberg Center and Julian's Mobile and Pervasive Lab, also attending to a circus of students presentations at the Zemeckis Media Lab. My running notes are here

zemeckis media lab (3) zemeckis media lab (1)

Technorati Tags:

Street Interconnectivity

Google Cartography: Street Art in Your Neighborhood is a curious google hack by Richard Jones:

Google Cartography uses Google via the Google Search API [] to build a visual representation of the interconnectivity of streets in an area.

This application takes a starting street and finds streets that intersect with it. Traversing the streets in a breadth-first manner, the application discovers more and more intersections, eventually producing a graph that shows the interconnectivity of streets flowing from the starting street.

Figures and show maps generated for two of the world's great cities, New York and Melbourne, respectively.

Why do I blog this? because I am fascinated by interconnectivity.

Spotscout: a real time space exchange marketplace

Via SpringWise: Spotscout is a web2.0 + car park application:

SpotScout provides a system that creates and facilitates a real time space exchange marketplace. Formally established in 2004, SpotScout's aim has been to create the applications, develop the marketplace, and secure intellectual property rights to real time mobile to mobile space exchange.

SpotScout's mission is to be the world's first en-route space reservation mechanism for public, private and garage parking and to pioneer mobile commerce solutions and technologies placing SpotScout at the forefront of this exciting industry. SpotScout is an easy to use voice and web-enabled service that connects parking spaces with drivers searching for them.

SpotScout also allows users to post their personal parking spots (we call these people 'SpotCasters') for other motorists to use, thereby monetizing an increasingly scarce resource in our cities and towns.

The SpotScout community grows daily, and will continue to do so until every driver feels there is a mechanism that will reliably find them a parking space the moment they need one.

Why do I blog this? "a real time space exchange marketplace": what a concept! after trading virtual objects gathered in a city with the location-based game MogiMogi, you can now trade real space. One of the side-effect of the social web? What happens then, will we have game theory situations?