The key aspects I noticed in Norman’s Emotion & Design: Attractive Things Work Better were the negative and positive valences, where affects have great implications towards how humans interact with and therefore achieve productivity in the use of everyday things (or better described as any tool).  I want to expand this concept and interpret this very affect and behavior to not only items such as teapots or any tool alike, but for the lived environment. I tend to agree with this framework, to the extent that I am fully confident that you will produce different work and express different levels of creativity through a lived metaphysical conversation in realtime. To highlight this with an example, I prefer sitting in a natural setting (garden, desert, beach) with no seating or furniture when I try to solve an issue or I want to focus on my creative aspects. After all, nature inspired half of the things we know today.

After Reading McMillan’s Her Code Got Humans on The Moon – And Invented Software itself I connected the storyline and experience of Margaret to that of Ada Lovelace. After all, they are both pioneers in their own respect. Lovelace developed the first known and documented computer program and directly worked with and gave more influence to Charles Babbage. Margaret reflects this pioneering and ingenious creativity by working on highly-technical work on software engineering through punch-cards and simulation. During the 1960s, this development process required a great deal of manual human intervention. I am inspired by her motives and ambition, and I wonder how many people she inspires today. Margaret’s work and achievements resonate within me today, and I believe she deserves even more credit, just like how Lovelace has a GPU architecture named after her.

“The hidden danger is to neglect areas not so easily addressed in science and engineering.” This outlines the principles in which Norman laid out that designers must  consider more htna functionality. The things we use should look good too. One important thing to consider is that we as humans are naturally drawn to what is beautiful.  When we consider that we must design around the human mind as Norman says, it is important that we consider aesthetics to a great extent as well as functionality. Furthermore, the aesthetics of the product should in some way fit the function of the device.

In terms of what she did for software: I think that this story shows us that code has to work more than just once. In a system such as a spacecraft, it becomes important to realize that these systems should be designed to be consistent. Another thing she made apparent was the importance of contingencies. Because of how when her daughter broke an important device, she learned to plan around it, it made it apparent that we must plan around unpredictable events and make sure that softwares will work even then,

Concept

This circuit demonstrates a simple, hands-free switch mechanism built using copper tape and Arduino Uno. The switch is activated by proximity without requiring mechanical pressure, enabling interaction with a system without physically pressing a button. The copper tape acts as a capacitive touch sensor,  using a Newton’s Cradle as part of the physical interface.

Video

Materials

• Arduino Uno
• Breadboard
• Copper Tape
• Jumper Wires
• Newton’s Cradle (for physical interaction mechanism)
• LED
• Resistors (330Ω)
• USB Cable

Setup

The circuit is composed of a basic LED switching system. Instead of using a traditional push button, the switch is implemented with two strips of copper tape placed strategically on the Newton’s Cradle to detect contact.

• One wire connects the copper tape to a digital input pin on the Arduino.
• The other strip connects to ground (GND).
• When a person touches or closes the circuit by interacting with the Newton’s Cradle, the circuit registers a state change.

Based on this input, the LED turns on or off, simulating a touch-activated switch.

I am happy with the result; Newton’s Cradle never fails to make something engaging.

For the Unusual switch I decided to continue the concepts I was exploring within the first seven weeks of interactive and generative art using p5.js. I call this switch the “Handcuff” switch. A general rule of thumb tells you “gif > any other file format” so here is my demonstration whilst also trying to re-enact how the person wearing the handcuffs would feel

const int switchPin = 2;
const int ledPin = 13;
bool handcuffsLocked = false; // tracks if handcuffs are on or off

void setup() {
  pinMode(switchPin, INPUT_PULLUP);  // Internal pull-up resistor
  pinMode(ledPin, OUTPUT);
  Serial.begin(9600);
}

void loop() {
  int switchState = digitalRead(switchPin);

  if (switchState == LOW && !handcuffsLocked) {
    handcuffsLocked = true; // lock the handcuffs
    digitalWrite(ledPin, HIGH);
    Serial.println("Handcuffs ON");
  }

  if (switchState == HIGH && handcuffsLocked) {
    handcuffsLocked = false; // unlock the handcuffs
    digitalWrite(ledPin, LOW);
    Serial.println("Handcuffs OFF");
  }

  delay(100);
}

I designed this basic code to detect and track when the handcuffs are unlocked. Mainly, it is a conditional that keeps track of the states (on) or (off).

Reading about Margaret Hamilton’s story was incredibly inspiring—especially the way she navigated a male-dominated field with intelligence and persistence. What stood out to me most was how seriously she took her code, and how she fought to ensure software was treated as a critical part of the Apollo mission. I admired her foresight and the way she challenged the idea that software was somehow secondary to hardware or engineering. As someone learning to code, I often feel like software is invisible or taken for granted, so seeing Hamilton’s impact reinforced how powerful and essential it really is. Her story makes me feel like being detail-oriented, stubborn, and thoughtful in code can actually change history.

Norman’s piece made me reflect on how often I prioritize function over form—especially as someone who tinkers with circuits and code. But his argument that emotional design improves usability resonated with me deeply. I’ve definitely had moments where a sleek interface or an intuitively designed device made me feel more confident and willing to explore, even if I didn’t fully understand the technical side yet. It’s fascinating to think that our emotional response can override frustration or confusion. The idea that beauty encourages persistence really stuck with me—I now realize that good design isn’t just about solving a problem, but about shaping how people feel while solving it.

Link to demo :

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1VTiRrGRrAj3aiTELux77pBYvCo3-3btS?usp=drive_link

For this week’s unusual switch assignment, I wanted to create something active and game-like — something that felt more like play than a standard circuit. That’s how I ended up designing a target switch using a cardboard folder, aluminum foil, and a ball. Instead of pressing a button or stepping on a pedal, the switch is triggered when I successfully throw a ball at the target. The core of my design is a DIY target made by slightly opening a cardboard folder and placing aluminum foil inside each flap. These foil strips are wired to the Arduino, and act as the two sides of a switch. When the ball hits the folder, it causes the foil pieces to touch momentarily — closing the circuit and turning on an LED.

const int SwitchPin = 3;
const int LEDPin = 12;

void setup() {
  pinMode(SwitchPin, INPUT_PULLUP); 
  pinMode(LEDPin, OUTPUT);
}

void loop() {
  const int Input = digitalRead(SwitchPin);

  if (Input == LOW) {
    digitalWrite(LEDPin, HIGH); // LED ON when ball hits target
  } else {
    digitalWrite(LEDPin, LOW);  // LED OFF otherwise
  }
}

The biggest challenge was making sure the foil only touches when I want it to — in this case, only when the ball hits the folder. I had to tape the foil securely and position it so that the folder remained slightly open. If it’s too loose, the foil touches on its own; too tight, and the impact doesn’t close the circuit. This project gave me a better understanding of how a simple digital input can be adapted into a physical interaction, using only basic materials like cardboard and foil. I also gained more confidence working with pull-up resistors and reading pin states accurately.

Margaret Hamilton is the kind of legend we don’t talk about enough. She wasn’t just a programmer, she was a problem-solver and a pioneer who helped put men on the moon while juggling motherhood and working in a field dominated by men. In the 1960s, software engineering wasn’t even considered a real thing yet, and yet, there she was, writing the code that saved Apollo 11 from disaster.

One of my favorite parts of her story is how NASA ignored her when she wanted to add safeguards to prevent astronauts from making mistakes. They told her, “That would never happen.” And then of course it did happen, and she had to fix it under pressure to bring Apollo 8’s astronauts home safely. That’s the kind of foresight and brilliance that makes her work so groundbreaking.

What’s even more inspiring is that she did all this while raising a kid. She’d bring her daughter to the lab, let her sleep on the floor while she worked late nights writing code. It’s proof that women have always been capable of incredible things in STEM. Hamilton didn’t just write software; she helped create an industry, proving that software wasn’t an afterthought, but the future.