"Us+ creator Lauren McCarthy, an artist and programmer at New York University, told me that the tension her technology creates was part of her intent" what??
So the intent was to create an app that frustrates people and shows them "that there are things the computer can’t do as well as a human". We have this experience I'd argue the majority of time with computers anyway, the whole point is breaking down that barrier. So if her statements are not a joke its just bad software design.
Otherwise, the concept of realtime communication aid seems ridiculous IMO. Do we really need a software buffer between us and another human in order to communicate better? I still prefer talking to people on the phone as compared to chat, and face-to-face over the phone, I'd assert you always loose information once you add buffers between two communicating parties.
Yeah, Us+ looks like an app that totally failed technologically so the author now pretends that it's ironic. If that was her intention from the beginning, she's kind of a troll.
I do see how the concept of an emotion reader would be helpful for some people. In particular, I know people who could really use a "sarcasm" flashing on the screen because they seem to miss it.
It sounds like the intent with Us+ was to be performance art. In other words, if it's baffling or strange and it makes you reconsider how you think about something, it worked.
>This past fall I left Boston, after spending the past 5 years there. To deal with the emotionally and logistically overwhelming task of giving a goodbye hug to all of the acquaintances and friends I have accumulated over this time, I designed the Hands-Free-Auto-OK/GOOD/GREAT-BYE! Machine.
That's exactly where I stopped reading. I was thinking the whole time that the app should not alter the conversation directly, but only give prompts that can be used or ignored. It smelled of really bad design. Then I see an "artist" did that intentionally. Nope.
So the intent was to create an app that frustrates people and shows them "that there are things the computer can’t do as well as a human". We have this experience I'd argue the majority of time with computers anyway, the whole point is breaking down that barrier. So if her statements are not a joke its just bad software design.
Otherwise, the concept of realtime communication aid seems ridiculous IMO. Do we really need a software buffer between us and another human in order to communicate better? I still prefer talking to people on the phone as compared to chat, and face-to-face over the phone, I'd assert you always loose information once you add buffers between two communicating parties.