Visualizing Data: On Paul Graham

Being that I've seen Paul Graham speak, have read his book, and am partial to his essays, the talks delivered for Visualizing Data (see below) didn't present a ton of new information.  That being said, it's worth taking a moment to discuss why it is that I enjoy Graham so much, and his most famous analogy between "hackers" and "painters".

Graham's style of speaking and writing is unquestionably authoritarian, and that's the beginning of what I like about him:  he's not afraid to have strong opinions, and to put them out there.  So many commentators today waste their time either pandering to the masses, or being incredibly extreme.  With Graham, you get the feeling that not only does he believe in what he's saying, but that he's given it some real thought.  Even his most caustic opinions (for example, his constant mocking of the Java programming language) are rooted in well thought out and valid positions.

Most of those positions end up being about one of three things:  smart people, hackers, or programming.  Which brings me to the second thing I like about Graham:  he's not afraid to admit that there are smart people out there in the world, and that they behave differently than others.  He's willing to cite the good (high productivity, more inspiration) and the bad (stubbornness, near autistic behavior), but most importantly he's willing to admit that they're smart.  These days we're far too bogged down in a culture where everyone's getting a pat on the head, and Graham is far more inclined to give the truth than to put a rosy tint on everything.

When discussing these super-intelligent "hackers", Graham then takes a stance that (as least when he originally took it) is unique:  he treats them as people and creators.  Computer programming has long been the subject of being compared to engineering and math, as a sort of technical discipline.   Graham takes his unique role as both an artist and a programmer and proposes the opposite: that programmers (or "hackers") are actually creative people who simply use an engineering device and medium as their means of expression.

This treatment culminates in Graham's famous analogy between hackers and painters.  The two groups are unique to each other, Graham supposes, in that they both have two roles: they have to decide what to do, and how to do it.  While many other creative/engineering jobs have two roles for this action (he cites architects and engineers as the "what" and "how", respectively), Graham points out that both painters and hackers are responsible for creating their idea, and then engineering it as well.


Paul Graham: Great Hackers
Paul Graham: Hackers And Painters

Awesomeness From Applications Class

A while back in applications class, a group had us do this awesome stop motion pong game.  Truly killer - just found the vid.  Enjoy!

Physical Computing Midterm: Media Controller; "Pancake"

The "Pancake"

Again, a bit late on the delivery of this one.  Apologies to those waiting with bated breath....

For our Physical Computing midterm, we were split into groups and asked to create a media controller of our own devising.  No limits or requirements were put in place, except that the controller would be a physical interface to the arduino, and would controller some external media device.  I was teamed with the wonderful Amy Chien and Chris Alden, and the three of us came to the conclusion that we'd like to build something of an electronic musical instrument.

To start things off, we brainstormed about possible ideas for the media controller's interface.  However, we came up with so many cool ideas that we almost immediately decided that we'd like to do multiple interfaces.  This worked its way into a concept for a modular music table, that would be split into various pieces, and allow three individuals to collaborate using three different interfaces. 

Hauling wood.

The first step we took was to construct the table surface.  We procured two large pieces of ply wood, and cut them into identical circles.  One circle was the table itself, while the other circle was cut into pieces for us to build the interface modules.  Each of us took on one of the modules, and each module used a different physical interface.  The three interfaces were wind based, pressure based, and a conductive sequencer.

All three interfaces.

Once we had completed and tested the three interfaces, we brought them together to the table, and unified them into a single instrument.  Each interface had its own arduino, which were then collectively wired into a labtop via a USB hub.  Once all three arduinos were recognized on the computer, we then hooked them up to Max/MSP and created a patch that would listen for the serial values from each interface, and use them to control tonal output.


The pressure pad controlled pitch bending, the wind interfaces controlled the speed of the tone playback, and the sequencer controlled the notes being played over the loop.  Once the patch was loaded, all three interfaces could be used simultaneously to control the computer's sonic output.  You can see a demo of one of our classmates joining us in trying out the interface above.


Finally, we presented our project in class.  Here you can see a brief clip of our presentation, which managed to go off without a hitch.  Midterm, complete. Go Pancake!

Physical Computing Week Eight Lab: Transistors and H-Bridge

Again, a bit late with this one, but better late than never.  In week eight of Physical Computing, we investigated the use of two slightly more complex devices:  the transistor and the h-bridge.

The transistor lab consisted of attaching a transistor to a small motor, and controlling the voltage output to the motor via the transistor.  This differs from a typical input/output in that the transistor can accept a far higher voltage than the arduino microcontroller's 5 volt power supply.  As such, the arduino can still be used to control a device that requires a much higher voltage.  The circuit with the motor can be seen above, while a video of the on/off control can be seen below.

The h-bridge lab consisted of using an integrated circuit known as an h-bridge to control the direction of current.  Put differently:  the motor from the first lab will run in different directions, depending on which way it is wired in the circuit.  The h-bridge allows us to select which direction of current we prefer, thus allowing for a single wiring scheme for the motor, but allowing us to decide (via a switch) which way we'd like the motor to rotate.  You can see a photo of the circuit above (the h-bridge is in the center), with a video of the bi-directional motor control below.

Visualizing Data: On Jonathan Harris

 While I'm a week or two late in posting, here are some thoughts on Jonathan Harris, complete with prompts from the Visualizing Data blog...


Do you find his pieces effective? 
Harris seems to desire an emotive, human aspect to his work, and in that sense I would say that his pieces are extremely effective.  He manages to create both visuals and text streams that manage to convey a good sense of emotion and the human element.  Part of this is rooted in his use of live data sets, that add an immediacy and reality to his work.  The randomness of the imagery also serves to deliver a feeling of humanity, as it creates a constant and undefinable imperfection to the work.



What might you change if it were your project? 
I feel as though I might use slightly less saccharine visuals.  While I feel that Harris' visuals are extremely effective, they have a certain pastel, Hallmark quality to them that doesn't quite appeal to me.


What tools (color, motion, etc.) does Jonathan employ to express emotive qualities in his work? 
Harris uses motion almost constantly in his work to relay a feeling of "nowness".  The constant movement creates an unavoidable sense that the dialogue is occurring as you sit there watching it.  He also uses pastel colors (presumably for their "emotive" feel), but as mentioned above, this really doesn't appeal to me.  Even in a site that riffs on the terrorism threat level, Harris still resorts to almost-pastels.


What makes his body of work feel different than Karsten’s or Aaron’s?
Most significantly for me, it's the use of live data.  Karsten and Aaron both obtain data sets, and then create a deliberate and planned visual for them.  Harris' creation of a more data "engine" allows him to use live data off the web, and create an immediacy and reality to his work that the others lack.

Visualizing Data: On Edward Tufte

 This week in Visualizing Data, we were asked to explore an delve into the work of Edward Tufte, specifically with regard to these two videos:  1, 2. We were then asked to explore a set of questions, as follows:

With Tufte’s close examination of the iPhone, did you find yourself alerted to interface elements you were aware of but hadn’t paid attention to? 
Maybe it's because I've had an iPhone for going on two years, or maybe because I've developed for it, but I didn't particularly find myself taken by surprise by any of the elements illustrated.


Does Tufte make assertions that you disagree with? (Choose a specific example and explain.) 
While I agree with Tufte's quest for more granularity on the weather page,  I disagree with his similar assessment of the stock market page.  While granular weather data (and a map) is something that carries weight for everyone, I think that most people, when checking their stocks, are looking for an extremely high level "what's the Dow" type of insight.  Tufte's stock graphic contained far too much information, and wasn't in the spirit of what the iPhone provides:  on the go data.  If I needed to go dissect 12 months of stock data, I wouldn't be picking up my iPhone; I'd be sitting down at a desk.


Where does Tufte think the best visualizations of today are published? 
Tufte expresses that the best visualizations come from those with extensive quantitative skills.  Specifically, he cites the "rock stars" of scientific journals, namely Science and Nature. 


What’s his logic for this conclusion? 
 His logic is based in the fact that the individuals producing these articles are extremely bright, have large data sets, and are offered limited space for their publications.  The result is a necessity to design high efficiency, extremely dense data presentations.


In general who does he see as the creators of great data visualizations? Scientists? Graphic Artists? Programmers? 
While he doesn't express a completely final opinion, it seems that Tufte has high regard for the actual producers of the data, who have a deep level of understanding for it.  In his description, he seems to focus most on scientists, while at the same time noting that certain people may need to assistance or hand holding of a graphic designer or artists.

What’s your own opinion, and what do you consider your label or role to be? 
 I think it's extremely difficult to make conclusions that are quite as decisive as Tufte's.  He seems to have relatively black and white opinions about the topic, and I actually feel that as time progresses that those who embrace multiple disciplines are those that will garner the most success.  As such, this is what I'm trying to do personally, and much of the reason I'm at ITP.  I already have an extensive technical skill set, but I want to augment that with other skills and insights, to ultimately yield a wider breadth of understanding.


How might an “anti-social network” function?
I think about this quite a bit, because socialization can be so life-dominating, that it almost seems like anti-socialization is going to become a useful and necessary tool.  Most obviously, an anti-social network might simply limit your media access to things that you needed to focus on, and keep the rest of the world at bay.  However, it could also do things to stratify people based on what they didn't like, and essentially do the reverse of all the attempted "matching" of similar interests that goes on today.

ITP Had A Haunted House

ITP had a Haunted House last night, and I did my best to add to the awesomeness.  Specifically, I borrowed an idea from David Bowie's 1997 stage installation, and decided to project some faces onto amorphous "head" type shapes.  My fellow ITP'ers were kind enough to indulge me with some awesome footage, and the result was some disembodied, creepy looking weirdness!  Thanks to Meredith for the pics...