Reading Tom Igoe’s articles helped me understand physical computing in a more thoughtful way, beyond just wiring things up and making LEDs blink (which to be fair, I do think is a preconceived notion that I have been gradually worn down through consecutive projects and readings in the class). In the first article (“Physical Computing’s Greatest hits and misses”), I appreciated how he explained that physical computing is really about building systems that can sense and respond to the world around them. This also reminded me of the discussion we had a couple of weeks ago on what defines interactivity. It also stood out to me because it made me think differently about my lie detector project — that I wasn’t just turning on lights but also creating a playful, real-world interaction in response to physical stimuli.
The second article (“Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen”) focused more on the nature of interaction, and it really resonated with me. He explains that real interaction happens when the user has control over the timing and nature of the input, rather than just pressing a button and triggering a fixed response. That reminded me of how, at first, my green LED would turn on as long as the button was pressed, even if there wasn’t enough pressure. It didn’t feel right, and reading this made me realize why. The system was reacting too easily, without enough real input from the user (this is also my re-interpretation of the event as well since this connection was mentally made a bit later). Adding a lower threshold fixed that and made the interaction more accurate. I think, overall, I’m left with concepts and ideas that can serve as tools to frame my projects and skills in this class, especially in the aspect of understanding interactivity and intentionality.