Monthly Archives: March 2013

Comment on Intuition: Use, Agency, Invitation by Amy Hogan

My definition of “intuition”: the sense of knowing (though maybe not being able to describe why or how…) that something is, or what will be. I had not thought before about this extending to the sense of “what could be”, but I think that it does. A hard-to-articulate combination of imagination and dreaming, and a sense of the world – combined in a way that brings out the best of both and makes newness a reality.

I think the idea of 3D printers leading to a whole…

I think the idea of 3D printers leading to a whole new way of thinking is very interesting. It would take some time to adjust to design with practically no manufacturing constraints but would come with developing new shapes and processes that we could not even imagine. Speaking of TED lectures, I saw one that featured an architect talking about a process he developed on the computer of folding a cube over and over to create shapes that are extremely intricate and he aimed to use them in a column. He basically gave the program certain constraints and had the computer repeat this "fold" over and over until he created a shape that would be nearly impossible to design or draw by hand. It seemed pretty similar to the idea of "computer augmented thinking."
http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_hansmeyer_building_unimaginable_shapes.html

I think the idea of 3D printers leading to a whole…

I think the idea of 3D printers leading to a whole new way of thinking is very interesting. It would take some time to adjust to design with practically no manufacturing constraints but would come with developing new shapes and processes that we could not even imagine. Speaking of TED lectures, I saw one that featured an architect talking about a process he developed on the computer of folding a cube over and over to create shapes that are extremely intricate and he aimed to use them in a column. He basically gave the program certain constraints and had the computer repeat this "fold" over and over until he created a shape that would be nearly impossible to design or draw by hand. It seemed pretty similar to the idea of "computer augmented thinking."
http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_hansmeyer_building_unimaginable_shapes.html

all good points, but I think the framework for the…

all good points, but I think the framework for the custom printed education system is already in place, the internet. If anyone watched every TED lecture and instructional youtube video online they would probably be as rounded as Da Vinci. And you can do this from your home, or in between classes. For free. If you really wanted to learn something it doesn't take a university and thousands of dollars. The real question at this point is why everyone ISN'T slightly knowledgeable in a number of fields.

all good points, but I think the framework for the…

all good points, but I think the framework for the custom printed education system is already in place, the internet. If anyone watched every TED lecture and instructional youtube video online they would probably be as rounded as Da Vinci. And you can do this from your home, or in between classes. For free. If you really wanted to learn something it doesn't take a university and thousands of dollars. The real question at this point is why everyone ISN'T slightly knowledgeable in a number of fields.

Comment on Family-ism by amyhogan

So interesting! My family has used the term “idiot lights” or “idiot light” to refer to the full suite of dashboard notification lights, or any one in particular that may be active at the time. Most often, of the low-gas or “check engine soon” variety.

A couple family-isms from my childhood, and then more recent days: “buck-chucker” or “money wall” (ATM); up until only the last year or so my youngest kids referred to our iPhones and the iPod-touch as “little iPads”.

First of all – BRILLIANT! What a powerful analogy…

First of all - BRILLIANT! What a powerful analogy you're exploring, with seemingly endless parallels..

Secondively,
"YES! Will it be messy? Absolutely! I argue that it is through these failed conceptions, misprints, and design changes that we learn the most about how the thing works, and where we gain the most power over our designs."

I had a similar reaction and thoughts at several points in reading Ted Nelson... he seems beyond frustrated with the paradigm-limited attempts to leverage technology to perpetuate broken systems (rightly so), but also shows no patience or appreciation for mistakes along the way. In fact, at one point he seemed disdainful toward those not making light-speed strides into a new dimension. Indeed, it is early mistake-fraught attempts into new arenas that I think help us understand needed changes in direction and approach, build awareness and a new level of understanding of the needs and opportunities, and set the stage for true advancement. And, by the way, the mistakes don't just inform the process and systems advancement - they inform our learning about our own learning and awareness. Powerfully valuable.

First of all – BRILLIANT! What a powerful analogy…

First of all - BRILLIANT! What a powerful analogy you're exploring, with seemingly endless parallels..

Secondively,
"YES! Will it be messy? Absolutely! I argue that it is through these failed conceptions, misprints, and design changes that we learn the most about how the thing works, and where we gain the most power over our designs."

I had a similar reaction and thoughts at several points in reading Ted Nelson... he seems beyond frustrated with the paradigm-limited attempts to leverage technology to perpetuate broken systems (rightly so), but also shows no patience or appreciation for mistakes along the way. In fact, at one point he seemed disdainful toward those not making light-speed strides into a new dimension. Indeed, it is early mistake-fraught attempts into new arenas that I think help us understand needed changes in direction and approach, build awareness and a new level of understanding of the needs and opportunities, and set the stage for true advancement. And, by the way, the mistakes don't just inform the process and systems advancement - they inform our learning about our own learning and awareness. Powerfully valuable.

First of all – BRILLIANT! What a powerful analogy…

First of all - BRILLIANT! What a powerful analogy you're exploring, with seemingly endless parallels..

Secondively,
"YES! Will it be messy? Absolutely! I argue that it is through these failed conceptions, misprints, and design changes that we learn the most about how the thing works, and where we gain the most power over our designs."

I had a similar reaction and thoughts at several points in reading Ted Nelson... he seems beyond frustrated with the paradigm-limited attempts to leverage technology to perpetuate broken systems (rightly so), but also shows no patience or appreciation for mistakes along the way. In fact, at one point he seemed disdainful toward those not making light-speed strides into a new dimension. Indeed, it is early mistake-fraught attempts into new arenas that I think help us understand needed changes in direction and approach, build awareness and a new level of understanding of the needs and opportunities, and set the stage for true advancement. And, by the way, the mistakes don't just inform the process and systems advancement - they inform our learning about our own learning and awareness. Powerfully valuable.