The reading “Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)” delves into the most popular physical computing projects over time. As I was going through the different project creations, I realized that the technology used in several of these would be very useful for people with disabilities. It would allow them to communicate and interact with others more easily, along with performing different activities without the need for any additional assistance. Certain projects that come to mind for this include the body-as-cursor and hand-as-cursor. Someone who is a paraplegic or quadriplegic would be able to express themselves more easily with these projects. Off the top of my head, I instantly thought of Stephen Hawking and how he has used a similar technology to communicate and express himself without moving any part of his body. The only thing I would like to add is that I wish we would’ve also gotten the point of view of someone who is not familiar with physical computing projects to get their take on what they think is the most popular or most beneficial of these projects. That being said, I appreciate how the reading informs users that just because a project has already been done by someone that does not mean that you can’t make it your own with just a few changes.
The reading “Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen” delves into the creation of interactive and interpretive art and informs the readers how the artist’s job is only to create and that they should leave it to the audience to interpret it however they like. This reading has made me realize how many artworks I’ve seen at shows and museums with interpretations provided as well. Though I didn’t think much about it at the time, I now wish I had been able to interpret it on my own as that would’ve made those artworks more personal to me and my experience. That being said, the artwork belongs to the artist and they have every right to do with it as they please. I believe if an artist wishes to provide an interpretation with their artwork, they have every right to do so, and the audience can’t be mad about it. I would also add that in the digital world of today, anyone can easily Google the interpretation of any artwork they don’t understand, so it would be much simpler to just provide the interpretation with the artwork in the first place. This would save the iPad generation a lot of time Googling the answer.
These readings both delve into the end-user experience with different projects. The first reading explains how people interpret different physical computing projects and the second reading explains how people interpret different interactive artwork. Both the readings also emphasize how no matter what each project or artwork was made for, everyone can use or interpret them according to their own needs and abilities.