I really enjoyed doing this reading. What actually got me thinking was how strict he is about needing all three steps. Like it has to actually process what the user does and hold onto some kind of memory so the response can change based on more than just the current input and then respond in a way that reflects that processing instead of just playing back a fixed effect. I think I agree with his sentiment (for now atleast).
That is actually a useful way to look at my own p5 sketches because most of what I have built so far leans hard on that same idea of reacting instantly, so it feels interactive but there is no real thinking step. A way to fix that would be introducing an actual state like tracking things like how long the users cursor lingers in an area and letting the sketchs behavior shift over time instead of resetting every frame. Even something simple, like the sketch remembering the last few interactions and varying its response based on that instead of just the instantaneous mouse position would push it from Crawford’s “reaction with good production values” into something closer to his actual definition of interaction. Though I’ll be honest I do not know how to go about doing it but I am definitely excited to learn and explore it in the coming classes!!!