LOCATION VS REALITY

Via doors of perception :

Soon, more people will play computer games on mobile phones than on computers or consoles. One out of every three Japanese – 38 million people – already uses i-mode “to connect real to life” as an i-mode brochure puts it. “Location is no longer a barrier to fun and competition”, it burbles. Was it ever? The more interesting question is how we will use wireless communications proactively to shape the way we experience places.
http://www.nttdocomo.com

PHONES BETTER THAN FOOD

Bookmarklets | MOVABLE TYPE

Via doors of perception :

The average teenage girl in Japan spends, or charges to her pliant parents, a hefty $300 a month. A significant minority spends far more. The money goes about equally on three things: food; fashion & beauty products; and the mobile phone. According to investor and moblogging eminence Joi Ito, when a sample of these girls was asked where they would cut back if – heaven forbid – their paltry allowance were to be reduced, a large majority said food would go first, then fashion, and phone calls (and now moblogging) last.
http://www.neoteny.com//a>

Add-on about Proximity and collaborative work

Bookmarklets | MOVABLE TYPE

In the article “Managing distances and differences in geaographically distributed groups”, David Armstrong and Paul Cole (in the same book by Kiesler and Cummings), add other proximity effects on work relations :

– chatting in the Hall
– feedback (distance blocked the corrective feedback loops provided by chance encounters)
– learning by watching
– out-of sight, out-of mind
– short is long (the effects of close proximity died off quickly with relatively little distance, making short distances equal to long ones in their effects on group interaction) : “Even if you are on the other side of the cafeteria, you are in another sphere of influence”

Reading Note : effects of proximity on collaboration

Bookmarklets | MOVABLE TYPE

Kraut, R. E., Fussell, S. R., Brennan, S. E., & Siegel, J. (in press). Understanding effects of proximity on collaboration: Implications for technologies to support remote collaborative work. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.)

Distributed work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

In this paper, the authors identify the mechanisms by which proximity males collaboration easier :

1. Initiating conversations : easier in physical settings than in mediated communication
1.1 proximity increases frequency of communication (people communicate most with those who are physically close)
1.2 likelihood of chance encounter
1.3 transitions from encounters to communication (+ expe : Kendon and Ferber, 1973)
1.4 community membership and repeated encounters -> common ground
BUT : (disdavantage of physical proximity) people must attend to the same thing at the same time : it must be synchronous + the opportunistic and spontaneous communication that is supports is not always welcome (interruption, loss of privacy) + it privilege people who are nearby
WITH technology : possible chatrroms and moo : chance to encounter thanks to buddy list (whi is available)

2. Conducting conversations
common ground, mutual knowledge
precise timing of cues, coordination of turn-taking, repaire of misunderstanding
BUT (disdavantage of physical proximity): cognitive demands on speaker and listener (monitoring what is being said, feedback…)
WITH technology : possible even though it is more difficult with other media, cf article Clark and brennan, least collab effort

3. Maintaining task and team awareness
BUT (disdavantage of physical proximity): this information (conveyed by physical proximity) is necessary for internal communication but not sufficient
WITH technology : challenging because too much information could be disruptive. But systems do exist. Here I can cite studies about the effect of awareness tools (cf my master thesis)

Proxemics

Bookmarklets | MOVABLE TYPE

Proxemics is the term coined by Edward Hall (1957) to describe the social use of space, and personal space in particular. Personal space is the area with invisible boundaries surrounding an individual’s body. This area function as a comfort zone during interpersonal communication. It disappear in environments (elevator, crowd). As a matter of fact, Hall proposes four main distances represented below that are employed in American interactions. Moreover, each distance has a particular meaning, in terms of the kind of interaction allowed. Hall argues that those meanings depends on the culture. Hall also shows how distance constrains the types of interaction that are likely to occur, by communicating to participants as well as observers the nature of the relationships between the interactants and their activity.

Category Approximate
distance
Kind of
interaction
Intimate
distance
up
to 0.5 meters
Comforting,
threatening
Personal
distance
0.5
to 1.25 meters
Conversation
between friends
Social
distance
1.25
to 3.5 meters
Impersonal
business dealings
Public
distance
more
than 3.5 meters
Addressing
a crowd

Bon del' absurde

Bookmarklets | MOVABLE TYPE

Lu ici :

Vos livres de chevet pour l’été ?
G. F. : Le catalogue Manufrance de 1972. Je relis les articles et compare les prix. À l’époque, on pouvait trouver une table de ping-pong pour 17,90 francs.

Votre endroit préféré pour la bulle ?
G. & G. : La fontaine de la place Maréchal-Lyautey. Nous aimons nous y baigner nus ou habillés, le vendredi, vers trois heures du mat, en sortant du Plastic People.

Qu’est-ce que vous faites pour les vacances ?
G. F. : Je suis bénévole dans une association caritative (“Les disques puzzle” – ndlr), qui mixe tous les samedis de l’été à la terrasse du Cosmo. Et je compte partir triper sur une île bretonne avec mes mômes.
G. B. : Un copain m’a donné une Honda 125 jaune. Quand j’aurai réparé le pneu arrière, je partirai on the road sur le bitume de Saint-Étienne.
G. & G. : Sinon, Testarossa est en concert le 17 juillet à la Scena, en première partie des Putrella For Ever. Pour l’occasion, nous jouerons nos trois tubes, Cheap Star, L’Avortement et Jean-Michel, que fais-tu là ?, sur plus d’une heure trente d’improvisation contrôlée.

Warchalking : a new form of street art ?

Bookmarklets | MOVABLE TYPE

Warchalking is the practice of marking a series of symbols on sidewalks and walls to indicate nearby wireless access. That way, other computer users can pop open their laptops and connect to the Internet wirelessly. It was inspired by the practice of hobos during the Great Depression to use chalk marks to indicate which homes were friendly.

warchalking.org
craiefiti (in french)

[c bien, ca rajoute encore des choses sur les murs apres les tags et les stickers, je prefere voir ca que des pubs avec des femmes denudees]