Walking into Chicago Public Library after work to pick up a book (I had no idea that you could get these things anywhere other than Amazon!), I saw a sign which said something to the effect of “The library auditorium will be open as of 10 a.m. for people to gather and watch the presidential inauguration.”

That’s neat, I thought. I would have liked to have been there.

You see, I watched the inauguration while I was at work. My co-workers were gathered in the break room watching a grainy tv broadcast. I was at my desk, watching a live, high-quality video feed from CNN augmented by a stream of mostly tacky or trite, but occasionally funny,  comments from the Facebook peanut gallery. (Great partnership, by the way; first time I actually saw the value in that social networking service.)

Fitting, perhaps, at the dawn of this new administration, in these times of purported Change, to be watching an event a thousand miles away, in real time, ‘accompanied’ by all of my ‘friends,’ who are scattered throughout the country, and indeed the world.  Does this ability of shifting time and place not represent the peak of technological achievement?

Well, yes it does …. I guess. The confluence of technologies such as the internet, streaming digital video and social networking have indeed given us the power to partially transcend the constraints of time and space, consuming information and communicating with people at our own convenience, regardless of the temporal and spatial gaps which divide us.

But to chalk this all up as an absolute and unqualified positive is conveniently (if not naively) leaving something out of the picture. Upon reading that sign on the door of the Chicago Public Library, I couldn’t help but feel a twinge of regret. Regret that technology enabled me to behold this event in such a personalized manner. Regret that I wasn’t there to witness this historic occasion in that auditorium filled with complete strangers, all bound together by nothing other than the fact that they all happen to reside in the same city. There’s something magical in that — the kind of magic that can’t be captured in a use case or a experience definition document.

Among the many wondrous things achieved by technology, the lowest common denominator may be that it makes our lives more convenient. Technologies like telephony or video-conferencing allow us to shift place, and talk to someone who’d never otherwise be able to see us or hear our voice. Recording technologies help us shift time, committing audio, video or some combination of the two to an archive which can be subsequently played back at will, regardless of whether it was recorded one minute or one hundred years prior. I’d argue that mobile technologies have facilitated something I call decision-shifting; no longer must we commit any appreciable amount ahead of time physically meeting at a particular time our place when we are but a text message or short phone call away from a last-minute change of plans.

So what’s the harm in all this ?

Perhaps this is too grave a word to use for what can be considered a somewhat frivolous concern. But what other term can be used to describe how technology like the microwave has impacted the tradition associated with a proper sit-down family dinner, how TiVo has affected the ceremony surrounding the weekly viewing of a favorite TV show among friends, or how email has all but taken every last bit of romance out of written correspondence.

I don’t say these things as a hater; I am a user and proponent of these technologies, and it is indeed my livelihood to further advance technology to better suit the needs of those who utilize it. But as a professional trained in human-computer interaction, I nevertheless think it is important to recognize how they impact us, on both an individual and a societal level. I don’t plan on halting my use of these time- and place-shifting technologies because of the barely audible din of social fabric slowly ripping apart, but  events like the one I’ve described here do give me pause, and a chance evaluate how my notions of sanctity have changed as a result of living in a whenever, wherever society.

**************************************************

Note: Apologies, reader, if, based on the title, you thought this article would be about something more exciting, like intergalactic travel or time-porting. Actally, I don’t even know what time-porting is, so you’re s.o.l. there.  Don’t ever check this blog for posts about time-porting, in fact, because it will likely just be a bunch of gibberish.

As I was exiting the building throughout the revolving door, there was someone else coming in at the same time; she had a suitcase and was awkwardly trying to simultaneously push the door, while still moving herself forward and making sure that her suitcase (of the rolly variety) didn’t get stuck in the door moving forward behind her. I modified my behavior to accommodate her pace, pushing slower than I would if I were in the door alone, and keeping an eye on her to make sure that things were moving along ok.

The interaction between two people at a revolving door is an interesting one. I suspect that most of the time, there is some kind of subconscious daemon process that is monitoring the other person to make sure that they’re not getting overtaken, accompanied by a micro-tweaking of the amount of pressure applied  to the door to meet the needs of the other.

The term microcoordination is used to refer to the act of (often using technology in) managing people and making near-term plans (e.g. I sms you to “meet me at Intelligentisa on Randolph in 10″) so maybe the term microinteraction is more appropriate in this example (I’m sure that this is a wealth of sociology lit on this topic and that they probably have a different term for it). I’m very intrigued by these kinds of opportunistic, chance situations in which two absolute strangers are forced to interact with one another, even if only in a subconscious level, and potentially modify their behavior, in order to achieve a specific goal (in this case, getting in or out of a building). It’s like being momentarily locked into a symbiotic relationship.

So my first question is, where else do microinteractions happen? I think driving is a good example. People are often forced to speed up or slow down in order to let some one into a lane. Or you may need to make eye contact with someone else at a Stop sign and give them the wave to go ahead. The condiment counter at a coffee shop is another good example (can I call milk and sugar condiments?); two or more individuals reaching under, around or patiently waiting for the sugar (turbinado or white?) and milk (skim, 2%, whole or soy?) to customize their morning cup. The elevator is another good example: that awkward couple of seconds after you enter the elevator and see someone half-jogging to make it before the closes, and you mime sticking your foot in the door or motion towards pressing the “door open” button in a half-hearted attempt to let them in, and then shrug as if to say “See – I tried!!!” as the double door slowly closes (oh come on – am i the only one who does this?). 

My second thought was: to what extent does this co-dependence (even if it is only for a couple of seconds) bring us closer to each other and how (if at all) is this beneficial? Would a community or an organization in which a significant number of quotidian tasks required some form of microinteraction with others be a happier, healthier one? Can this be “designed in” without adding extra burden to people’s lives? Or is it merely an emergent behavior to be studied, and not orchestrated?

OK, and now back to the revolving door and world peace. It’s a bit of a stretch to imagine forcibly designing microinteraction into tasks that currently don’t require it. And of course the chance of this working on any kind of international level is infinitesimally small. But as a thought exercise, think for a second what it would be like if everyone in the world were engaged in the same microinteraction, if we all had to work together, just for a second or two, to achieve some task. How would it affect you to know that some anonymous person across the world sacrificed a trifle for your benefit? Would you be willing to give up something trivial for someone else, someone you’ve never met and never will? Could all these small sacrifices change the world for the better?

The interdependency between people, or between humans and the environment, is often described as a web. But I think it’s more like a revolving door.  Some of us may be trailing suitcases, while others have both hands free. Some of us can push faster, while others must push slower. But if any one person pushes too fast, it ruins it for everyone else, and no one gets in to or out of the building.

Here’s a link to the application in the App Store, and a screenshot:

A screenshot of the “iBlessing” iPhone app

I personally don’t say blessings over food or at sunrise/sunset, etc. but if you do, and for some reason still have a hard time remembering them, then this is the app for you. Just don’t be using it on the Sabbath, because then you’re surely canceling out any favor you’ve garnered with the almighty deity (that’s God … not Steve Jobs) by whipping out your iPhone 3G on the Lord’s Day.

A novelty, sure, but being that I actually purchased a physical Say-A-Blessing device for my parents, I was intrigued at this foray into the digital space. Looking at the application description on the iTunes Application Store, I was taken with the kitsch and novelty of it. But I actually don’t have an iPhone and so this isn’t a review of the application, so much as a review of the application’s description.

Go on, go back and read it again. All the way through this time.

After the motivation for the application, and list of supported prayers, at the very end of the description is a sentence which reads: “Finally a religious device with buttons that doesn’t explode.”  

 Eeeek. Ouch. Wow. Awwkkwwaaaard. Really, did you just say that? First off, in this golden era of peace,  love and happiness amongst the nations of Middle East, where people are dying on a daily basis because of such “religious devices” it seems at the very least, insensitive to say such a thing. And, not to say that an insensitive remark in the description of a dinky iPhone app will actually have any negative repercussions, but we’re living in a global community, and even actions in jest can, and will, be taken the wrong way when the audience is large enough to include those whom the action or comment potentially targets. And furthermore, the iPhone doesn’t even have any buttons – that’s the whole point of it, duh.

On the Chicago El train the other day, I came across an ad on the ceiling!! On the ceiling!! As if the ones on the walls and the outside of the train weren’t enough. And of all things, the ad was for toilet paper. Is toilet paper something that really needs to be advertised? Have bidets been making enough of a comeback to put toilet paper industry at risk? Well, in all fairness, I guess like any other commercial product, there’s some stiff (or should i say soft and luxurious!) competition between brands. At least it’s not philosophically as bad as ad campaigns for avocadoes, milk or cheese. What’s the alternate? Not cheese?

But I don’t think we’ve gone far enough with ads. I think that there are several more frontiers that have yet to be explored:

1) Sleepvertising Think of the 8+ hours a day people waste not being exposed to ads! What better things do we have to do during this ‘downtime’ (repair cells? flush our brains of unnecessary memories? i think that stuff is a bunch of science mumbo jumbo). Why waste time dreaming about silly things like unicorns or flying through galaxies when you could dream about swimming through a sea of chocolate ….. Ghirardelli’s Decadent Deluxe 70% Cacao chocolate, that is I’m sure the people at Nielsen or Google can come up with a pillow-top box or inner-ear insert which could serve up these ads. Wow – the idea of contextually-relevant ads in dreams is quite disturbing: does this mean that, in my dreams, when I get up on stage, stark naked, to perform a solo on the mandolin (which I’ve never played), someone in the audience will offer to sell me Gap Khakis and/or give me mandolin lessons? Sweet!

2) Eatvertising Brightly colored packaging is great for advertising to kids on cereal boxes, but what about all those opportunities for completely unbranded foodstuffs, such as the meat or potatoes served in a restaurant? I’d be perfectly happy enjoying a free meal at a fancy Chicago steakhouse, even if it did mean that each individual slice of my steak had a little graphic on it which reminded me that this meal was ‘made possible by’ some local law firm or megacorporation. You could always just flip it over or smear some mashed potatoes on top and make believe that you’re eating unbranded meat.

3) Adver-advertising-tising Think about how much space in a normal ad is wasted not getting the point across. For example, take the generic example of a condominium ad that shows someone enjoying a glass of wine and a sparkling view of the city skyline from their super-modern granite kitchen in their new condo. Why does it have to be ‘just a glass of wine.’ Can’t it be a glass of Francis Ford Coppola 2005 Zinfandel Reserve? And why settle for an unbranded faucet when it can be a Koehler? By embedding ads in other ads, corporations can maximize the impact of a single impression and also promote partnerships.

I hope that, in the future, advertisers and marketers will wise up and figure out how to relieve us of all these ad-impoverished moments of our lives, and also figure out how to maximize the times when we are obediently absorbing these messages by cramming as many pitches as possible into a given time and space.