Before watching the video, I did not like the idea of disorder or randomness, as I felt like it meant going out of routine. I feel more comfortable with the expected rather than the unexpected. After hearing Casey Reas’s thoughts about how it can be used as a tool to create something that the artist may not have expected, I am more open to it and think that it can create unique outputs. It also made me realize that if I were not open to it, then I would not have been able to code my second assignment. My second assignment used the random() code to generate the different colors of the dance floor. In [27:03] he talks about Lia’s random 4×4 generative design and how the increase in deviations of pixels transitioned the design from order to chaos. This made me realize that I answered the first question, which is that I have already implemented that chaos part in my second assignment, where I have the tiles/rect() randomly change between 35 and 40, which made it visually dynamic and added energy like how a real, lively dance floor would. For the second question, I think that a balance between randomness and complete control is the best because there should be structure, but having randomness makes the final design look more unique and interesting. So, for my Assignment 2 example, if the frameRate() was high, then the dance floor tiles would be too chaotic to the point that they would not have even looked like a dance floor. Thus, having a good balance between chaos and control is best as long as the meaning of what you are trying to depict is still understood.