Reading 1
I don’t completely agree with the author’s criticism that modern technologies like touchscreens and digital interfaces make interaction feel “glassy” and disconnected. While it’s true that they remove some tactile feedback, I think their purpose isn’t to replace physical touch but to make life more efficient and accessible. For example, instead of physically going to a post office to send a letter, I can send an email or message in seconds. This doesn’t make the experience meaningless it just reflects how technology has evolved to save us time and effort. These interfaces have also allowed people with disabilities to communicate, work, and interact in ways that might not have been possible with traditional physical tools. In that sense, “pictures under glass” might actually expand human capability rather than limit it.
However, I understand the author’s point about how important our sense of touch is and that certain interactions lose something when they become purely digital. For example, learning to play a real piano or sculpting clay engages the hands in ways that a touchscreen keyboard or 3D modeling app never could. I think the balance lies in knowing where tactile interaction matters and where digital convenience should take over. For creative or learning experiences, keeping physical feedback is valuable it builds skill, emotion, and memory. But for communication, organization, and quick access to information, digital tools are the smarter choice. So rather than rejecting “pictures under glass,” I think the future of interaction should combine both worlds using technology to simplify life without losing the richness of real, physical touch.
Reading 2
After reading Bret Victor’s responses, I actually liked his explanation a lot more because it helped me understand his real point. At first, I thought he wanted us to go “old school” and reject technology completely, like he was against modern progress. That’s why I used the example of sending an email instead of going to the mailbox because I thought he didn’t appreciate how technology saves time and makes life easier. But after reading his clarification, I realized he’s not saying we should stop using touchscreens or digital tools; he’s saying we should build on them and make them better. I especially liked his comparison of the iPad to black-and-white film before color came along that made so much sense. He wants us to advance technology even further, but in a way that brings back the richness of physical touch and real interaction. I still think that won’t be possible for everything, because the future is definitely digital, but if we can find ways to blend technology with physical sensations, that would be amazing it would make our interactions more natural, creative, and human.