For me, the concept of interactivity was always intuitive. I never tried to establish the definition of interactivity. The reading helped me delve deeper into what interactivity is and made me think about whether the actions we perform every day that imply interactions with objects can be called interactivity. Moreover, it helped me get a better sense of what interactive design is, which I’ll try to implement in my future projects.
The author made a good point about the three main features of interactivity: listening, thinking, and speaking. But the use of these terms in the text is quite vague. Even though the author considers an act of turning the light on in a refrigerator by human an interaction, I don’t think that this interpretation is right. I believe that the term interactivity should be split between digital interactivity and natural interactivity. I consider them to be two different terms because natural interactivity offers a wider range of reactions than digital interactivity. While interacting with people or other living creatures, we cannot always predict the way another actor will react. At the same time, while interacting with computers, particular actions have specific outcomes that are always the same for each action. Therefore, from my perspective, it would be wise to distinguish between natural and digital interactivity based on the concept of predictability.