Month: October 2025

Reading Response Week 8

The balance between aesthetics and usefulness has always been a hot topic. My perspective on beauty and productivity is that if something does its job well, that is enough. I used to value productivity more than aesthetics. According to the reading, for a product to be truly beautiful, it “has to fulfill a useful function, work well, and be usable and understandable” (p. 7). I agree with this idea because if a product does not serve its intended purpose, it fails to justify its existence.

However, in reality, this is not always the case. Take Apple, for example. People love Apple products because they are well-designed and undeniably beautiful. Yet, in terms of productivity, they may not always be the most practical option. MacBooks, for instance, perform most of the functions that a laptop should, but they lack a USB port. While users can buy external hubs, many find it inconvenient and would prefer at least one built-in port. Despite this, people continue to buy MacBooks. The success of Apple’s stock market performance suggests that many consumers value aesthetics just as much as, or even more than, productivity.

The next reading, about the code that helped send people to the moon, reminded me of the importance of checking and rechecking every detail. It shows why it is essential to anticipate every possible error, even those that seem unlikely or unnecessary. Launching the P01 program midflight might have seemed like a situation that would never occur, but it did. If Lauren had not accounted for this scenario, the outcome for Jim Lovell and the mission could have been very different.

Week 8: Reading Reflection

Attractive things Work Better

I’ve always noticed how looks can open doors. It’s something people like to call pretty privilege. In most industries, they prefer someone who has good looks. You see it everywhere at the airport check-in counter where the smiling, well-dressed staff makes you feel calm, or in a company that hires someone polished to sit at the front desk because, somehow, they represent the brand better.

We are naturally drawn to beauty, whether it’s a charming smile or a sleek phone screen. Companies know this; that’s why a tech gadget with a glowing logo or a car with smooth curves often sells better than a clunky but equally powerful competitor. Don Norman’s idea that “attractive things work better” isn’t just about vanity. it’s about psychology.

A MacBook isn’t the fastest laptop in the world, and yet when we open that smooth aluminum case and feel the satisfying click of the keys, we tend to believe it’s faster, smarter, and somehow more capable. The elegant design creates a sense of trust and delight that shapes how we experience the product. The beauty of it literally makes us think it works better.

Attractive design doesn’t just sell. It softens us. It makes us more patient with flaws, more forgiving of errors, and more willing to explore. That’s the secret power of beauty: it opens the door for better experiences.

Norman explains this beautifully in “Attractive Things Work Better.” He talks about how our emotions influence the way we interact with the world. When something looks good, it makes us feel good and when we feel good, we actually perform better. He even gives a simple example: imagine walking on a wooden plank that’s safely on the ground you’d stroll across without a second thought. But put that same plank high in the air, and suddenly, your fear takes over, your body stiffens, and it becomes ten times harder. The situation didn’t change; your feelings did.

That’s what happens with design too. When we see something beautiful like a teapot with elegant curves or a smartphone that feels right in our hands it puts us in a positive mood. We become more relaxed, more open, and surprisingly, even more creative. Norman calls this the power of positive affect. It’s why we forgive a beautiful product for small flaws but get frustrated quickly with an ugly one, even if it works just as well.

So when I think about “pretty privilege,” it’s not just about faces or appearances it’s about how beauty changes behavior. Attractive people, like attractive designs, create comfort and trust before a single word is spoken or a single button is pressed. And through this text, I feel like it helped me see that aesthetics aren’t shallow; they’re psychological. Beauty works because it changes us somehow.

Her Code Got Humans On The Moon — And Invented Software Itself

When I was in eighth grade, our school hosted a  movie event through a club called Global Female in STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics). They showed movie called “Hidden Figures” which is  the story of three brilliant African-American women, Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson, whose work made NASA’s early space missions possible. I remember sitting there, completely mesmerized, realizing for the first time how many women had shaped history from behind the scenes, only to have their names forgotten.

Since that day, I’ve carried a quiet admiration, and maybe a little fire, for women in STEM who were never given the recognition they deserved. Now, as a Computer Science major myself, I’ve felt small moments of that same bias. Sometimes, it’s a look that says “are you sure you can do this?” It’s subtle, but it stings like being told you have to prove your worth twice before anyone believes it once.

That’s why reading about Margaret Hamilton hit differently and fill me up with pride. Here was a woman in the 1960s, leading a team at MIT, writing code that would land humans on the moon  all while raising her daughter.

The image of her bringing her little girl to the lab late at night felt so familiar. My mom, also a working mother in STEM, used to take me to her computer lab  when I used to be alone. Margaret’s story reminded me of my mother of every woman who’s ever juggled passion, work, and motherhood with quiet strength.

What moved me most was how Margaret didn’t just write code; she invented software engineering itself. She gave structure, respect, and permanence to something the world didn’t even consider a real science yet. And when her code saved the Apollo 11 mission, it wasn’t just a victory for NASA. It was proof that brilliance has no gender.

Reading her story filled me with pride. It made me realize that every time a woman like Margaret Hamilton, or my mother, or even I sit behind a computer and type, we’re not just writing code. We’re continuing a legacy.

Reading Response Week 8

Norman’s ideas highlight that aesthetics are not just surface decoration but a way for design to work with the human mind rather than against it. When something looks and feels good to use, our brains relax into a more open, imaginative mode. We stop fighting the interface and start exploring through it. This isn’t about luxury or indulgence. It’s about survival in a world full of cognitive overload. A beautiful interface lowers emotional friction, it turns stress into curiosity. Even something as small as the choice of a teapot, depending on mood, shows how design can become a companion to our emotional state. Good design doesn’t simply function well It cares for the user’s attention, focus, and resilience, allowing “pleasure” to become a quiet form of intelligence.

Margaret’s “software engineering” wasn’t only about logic and precision, but it was about understanding the unpredictable human behind the code. When Hamilton built systems that could recover from error, she was acknowledging fear as real variables in the machine. She designed not for perfection but for forgiveness. The Apollo guidance software’s ability to prioritize critical tasks during overload was, at its core, a kind of empathy written in code. It recognized that even astronauts under pressure could make mistakes, and that the system should protect rather than punish them. Hamilton’s foresight turned technical design into an act of emotional intelligence, embedding trust and calm into the most high-stakes environment imaginable.

Norman and Hamilton sketch a fuller philosophy of design, one that sees beauty and reliability, emotion and logic, not as opposites but as collaborators. Norman’s teapot and Hamilton’s Apollo code both remind us that good design anticipates human vulnerability and builds grace into its response. Whether the context is a kitchen or a lunar landing, the designer’s role is to create conditions where people can think clearly, act confidently, and recover gently from error. The aesthetic and the algorithm share the same goal: to make complexity humane.

Week 8 – Unusual Switch

Concept
I always keep my magnetic cardholder attached to the back of my phone. It can hold one to three cards comfortably without them falling out. Recently, I almost lost my NYU FAB card, which had around 800 dirhams on it for my study abroad visa appointment. I was so upset and searched my room for two days, cleaning everything. Finally, I found it under my glasses case. That was such a relief. From now on, I’ll always keep it in my cardholder.

For this Arduino project, I reused the LED code from class. The light stays on when the card is outside the holder, and it turns off when the card is inside, showing that it’s safe. I used aluminum foil to extend the wire’s conductivity and duct tape to build a working prototype.

Photo
Video
Unusual Switch on Arduino UNO

Highlight of the code
That’s actually the entirety of the code. The code itself is simple. It starts with a 5V input, and I used digitalWrite(2, LOW) to let the electricity flow since it works from high to low. The system detects when there is contact with the card. If the card touches the sensor, the LED turns off. If there’s no contact and the card is outside the holder, the LED stays on as an alert to remind the user to put the card back for safety. That’s exactly what I did with my FAB card.

void setup() {
  pinMode(13, OUTPUT); // led pin
  pinMode(2, INPUT);  // foil pin
  digitalWrite (2, LOW);
}

void loop() {
  int cardtouch = digitalRead(2);

  if (cardtouch == LOW) { 
    digitalWrite(13, HIGH); 
  } else {
    digitalWrite(13, LOW);
  }

}

Reflection
It’s clear that the prototype isn’t perfect. I can already see ways to improve it, especially since the wires limit the movement of the card. Using a motion or distance sensor would be a better option if I want to make it portable and attach it to my cardholder. The foil isn’t always reliable either. It sometimes slips off the wire, which reduces conductivity and can cause the LED to give the wrong signal. Still, I think it’s great that after just one class, I could use the same code to create something useful that I might actually use in the future.

Week 8 – Reading Reflection

Her Code Got Humans on the Moon:

Margaret Hamilton’s story impressed me with how much dedication and focus one person can bring to their work. She did not see programming as a small or temporary job, she treated it as something worth building a whole discipline around. At a time when few people even understood what software was, she worked with a sense of seriousness and care that helped define the entire field. I found it admirable that she led a team in such a demanding environment, while also constantly pushing for precision and reliability in every line of code. It must have taken even more determination to do this in a male-dominated field, where her ideas were often questioned or overlooked. Yet she proved that talent and persistence can speak louder than bias.

The moment that stayed with me most was when people told her, “That would never happen.” She had warned about a potential error that others dismissed as impossible, but it did happen during the Apollo 11 mission. Because of her preparation, the software knew how to handle it, and the astronauts landed safely. This part made me reflect on how important it is to think beyond what seems likely or convenient. Her ability to imagine every possible mistake shows not only intelligence but humility, the awareness that humans and systems can fail, and that good work anticipates that. Hamilton showed that real achievement does not come from recognition, but from persistence and attention to detail. Even when others doubted her, she stayed focused on what she believed was right. That quiet confidence and responsibility are qualities I hope to develop in my own work.

Emotions & Design: Attractive things work better

This reading made me think deeply about how design affects both our emotions and our behavior. One of the main ideas is that attractive things work better because they make people feel happy and confident. The author explains that when we feel good, our minds become more open and creative, but when we are stressed, we tend to think narrowly and make mistakes. I found this especially interesting because it shows that emotions are not separate from thinking, they actually shape how we use and understand things. Another important idea the author discusses is that good design balances beauty and function. This made me reflect on how I interact with everyday objects. For example, I prefer using items that are both practical and attractive whether it’s a tea set, a notebook, or even my phone interface. When something looks nice, I automatically treat it with more care and feel more motivated to use it.

I also strongly connected with the author’s point about context and mood. He writes, “Design matters, but which design is preferable depends upon the occasion, the context, and above all, upon my mood.” This reminded me of how Kazakh families choose different tea sets depending on the situation. When it is just family, they use the simplest and fastest set. But when guests come, they always bring out the most beautiful one to show respect and hospitality. Another part that stood out to me was how the author connects pleasure with usability. He suggests that when something looks good, we are more tolerant of small problems. I realized this is true for me too, I do not mind if a pretty cup is a bit heavier or a stylish app takes a second longer to load, because its beauty gives me a pleasant feeling. I even change my tea sets every season, one for winter, spring, summer, and fall, because I enjoy drinking from something that matches the season’s atmosphere. The same goes for digital things: an attractive design makes me feel happier and more productive.

week 8 – reading response

Reading Norman’s Emotion & Design and Her Code Got Humans on the Moon made me rethink what we usually praise in tech. Norman’s main idea that “attractive things work better” makes sense at first. If a product is enjoyable to use, we’re more likely to stick with it. But honestly, it feels a bit too neat. Just because something looks good doesn’t mean it works well. I’ve had plenty of apps or gadgets that are gorgeous but a pain to actually use. Norman makes a strong point about emotion shaping usability, but sometimes I feel designers lean on aesthetics as a crutch instead of solving real problems.

On the other hand, Her Code Got Humans on the Moon reminded me that behind every “perfect” design or software is a ton of human effort — in this case, women programmers whose work literally made moon landings possible. It’s wild how long their contributions were invisible. It makes me question why we hype technology itself while ignoring the people who make it run. The “heroic inventor” story Norman sometimes leans on in design discussions seems incomplete — we rarely celebrate the actual humans doing the work.

Putting these together, I think the readings challenge the usual tech narrative. Norman focuses on emotion and aesthetics, which are important, but Her Code highlights that real success comes from skill, persistence, and problem-solving. My takeaway? Great design isn’t just about looking or feeling good — it’s also about respecting and acknowledging the humans who make it work. Otherwise, we’re praising the wrong things and missing the bigger picture.

Shahram Chaudhry – Week 8 – Reading Response

 

Attractive Things Work Better

I found this reading surprisingly relatable (although initially with the 3 teapots, I was a little confused). Norman’s main point that beauty and usability aren’t opposites and that they can co-exist, really made me rethink how I view design. He talks about how our emotions directly affect how we perform tasks. For example, negative affect (like anxiety) actually focuses the mind, which I never thought about before. I used to assume all anxiety was bad, but Norman explains that in situations where quick focus is needed, like immediate problem-solving, that stress can actually help.

What also stood out to me was the idea that people are more forgiving of poor design when they’re in a positive mood. I’ve totally felt that. When I’m calm, I barely notice small glitches on Brightspace, but when I’m stressed,  like submitting an assignment at the last minute, the same delay feels ten times longer and way more frustrating.

I liked his reflection about beauty too, especially the part about how true beauty isn’t just surface-level. A product can look good, but to be truly beautiful, it has to work well and make sense to use. That reminded me of how we say “beauty is in the character” for people; Norman’s basically saying that the same applies to design. Beauty in products has to go deeper than aesthetics, it has to come from function, usability, and how it makes us feel.

Overall, this reading made me realize that emotion is not a distraction in design, it’s actually a tool. How we feel shapes how we interact, and that’s something I’ll keep in mind whenever I evaluate or create something from now on.

Her Code Got Humans On The Moon — And Invented Software Itself

I really enjoyed this reading, especially the part where the author points out that one of the “founding fathers” of software was actually a mother. I thought that was both funny and powerful. It highlights how Margaret Hamilton broke stereotypes in a field that was (and still is) dominated by men. The story captured how she managed to fit into that environment, joking around with her colleagues and saying she was “one of the guys”,  but also how she stood out because of her intelligence and persistence. What struck me most was how her higher-ups ignored her idea for error checking, insisting astronauts were “too well-trained to make mistakes.” It reminded me of a previous reading where we discussed how engineers often think so logically that they expect others to be perfect, almost machine-like. But humans aren’t machines, and Hamilton proved that. When an astronaut actually made the very mistake she had warned about, it became her “I told you so” moment,  except it came with nine hours of problem-solving that could’ve been avoided.

As a computer science major, I found it fascinating that error checking wasn’t considered intuitive back then. Today, we’re taught to expect mistakes and build systems that can handle them, but that mindset didn’t exist yet. Hamilton’s work showed that great engineering isn’t just about logic, it’s about anticipating imperfection, because humans are imperfect anyways. 

Week 8 – Unusual switch

Concept:

I designed a project inspired by one of my favorite arm exercises. The idea is to make the arm’s movement interact with light using an Arduino. I attached pieces of foil and wires on both sides of the arm at a specific distance. As the person bends their arm, the foil pieces move closer together. When the arm is fully bent, the foils touch and complete the circuit, causing both the yellow and blue LEDs to turn on. At the same time, the yellow LED starts blinking while the blue LED stays steadily lit. This setup transforms a simple arm exercise into an interactive experience. The lights provide visual feedback, it also makes the activity more engaging and helps represent effort and motion in a creative, easy-to-understand way.

Coding:

Arduino file on Github

int ledBlue = 8;      // Blue LED pin
int ledYellow = 4;    // Yellow LED pin
int foilSwitch = 2;   // Foil switch pin

void setup() {
  pinMode(ledBlue, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(ledYellow, OUTPUT);
  digitalWrite(foilSwitch, HIGH);
 
}

void loop() {
  int switchState = digitalRead(foilSwitch); // read foil switch

  if (switchState == LOW) {  // foils touching
    digitalWrite(ledBlue, HIGH);
    digitalWrite(ledYellow, HIGH);
    delay(500);                    // on for 500ms
    digitalWrite(ledYellow, LOW);
    delay(500);
    digitalWrite(ledBlue, LOW);
    digitalWrite(ledYellow, LOW);
  }
}

I defined three integers: ledBlue for the blue LED on pin 8, ledYellow for the yellow LED on pin 4, and foilSwitch for the foil sensor on pin 2. Then, in the setup part, I set the LEDs as outputs and used the internal pull-up resistor for the foil switch so it can detect when the foils touch each other. In the loop, I made the Arduino constantly read the state of the foil switch. When the foils touch, the circuit closes, and both LEDs turn on, the blue LED stays on, while the yellow LED blinks every half second. When the foils are not touching, both LEDs stay off.

Setup:

Photo SetupDemonstration Video

Reflection:

This project taught me how simple electronics can respond to physical movement and turn a regular arm exercise into an interactive activity. I learned how to use an Arduino to read input from a foil switch and control LEDs, as well as the difference between input and output pins and how HIGH and LOW signals work with a pull-up resistor. For future improvements, I could also try different colors or numbers of LEDs to show progress in a clearer way. Another improvement is to make the device more comfortable to wear on the arm, so it can be used easily during exercises. I could also practice adjusting the code to make the lights respond faster and more smoothly to the arm movement.

Reading Reflection – Week 8

Don Norman — “Emotion & Design: Attractive Things Work Better”

Don Norman argues that it’s important to design things to be visually pleasing and attractive because it makes us happier and improves how people use them. I agree with him because there were countless times when my mood or motivation dropped just because the things around me looked unattractive. A prime example for me is the room I work in, I probably wouldn’t be able to finish, let alone even start doing my work if I were in a gloomy room with barely any colors, or furniture that doesn’t complement each other. Overall, I find that I’m in a much more positive state of mind when I’m surrounded by things with an appealing design.

Robert McMillan — “Her Code Got Humans on the Moon”

The article about Margaret Hamilton really made me think about just how important not only the mission is, but the people who helped make it happen. Hamilton was a computer scientist in the 1960s who worked in MIT, where she led the development of the onboard flight software for the Apollo missions. I found it very impressive how she managed to succeed in a male-dominated field while also juggling her personal life, such as caring for her daughter, all while doing groundbreaking technical work at such a young age.

Thanks to Hamilton’s experience and clever approach to handling errors or casualties, she was able to save the astronauts on the Apollo 8 flight and bring them back home. I find it truly inspiring that even before they launched the mission, Hamilton wanted to add error-detection code “just in case.” Even when her higher-ups thought it was unnecessary, she didn’t give up and made sure the system could handle unexpected problems, and her preparation paid off in the end.

W8: Her Code Got Humans On The Moon Reflection

It’s revolutionary to see the scale of what Margaret Hamilton achieved. She didn’t just break gender stereotypes, she essentially founded an entire discipline that grew into a billion-dollar industry: software engineering. While we all remember Neil Armstrong as the first man to step on the moon, we rarely think about the person who made that step possible. Reading about Hamilton made me realise how much unseen effort lies behind every historic moment.

As a woman in computer science, a field still largely dominated by men, her story feels deeply personal and inspiring. It’s empowering to see someone who not only challenged norms but also redefined “engineering.”

One part of the reading that resonated with me on a technical level was Hamilton’s insistence on anticipating and handling errors. When I first started learning to code, I used to find “try,” “except,” and “catch error” statements frustrating and unnecessary. I would think, why not just tell users not to make mistakes? But Hamilton’s experience showed the flaw in that thinking. Even an astronaut, among the most trained and intelligent individuals, made an oversight that could have led to mission failure. That moment completely reframed my understanding: robust systems are not built on the assumption that people won’t perform error, but on the expectation that they inevitably will.

This reading reminded me that testing, error handling, and designing for failure are not tedious parts of coding, they’re acts of responsibility and necessity. Margaret Hamilton’s story shows that great engineering is not just about writing functional code but about preventing failure, protecting people, and thinking ahead. It’s a mindset I want to carry into every project I work on.