David Rose explains how companies want to maximize pixel space which is unfortunate as it is distracting – particularly in China. Here, each elevator is filled with moving screens which makes one feel tired and leads to one being able even to forget what one was doing on an elevator in the first place. For example, certain cities in the West limit the number of ads that can be shown in certain areas. Certain cities in Europe do not allow pixel advertising as it is viewed as a destruction of the natural beauty of cities.
David Rose also talks about robots that look like humans and how creepy that can become. He questions the implicit assumptions designers make that robots should be similar to humans in terms of appearance: why not make them different? Why should such creations make people confused? Animism is a trap, and it makes people feel either confused or annoyed or both. I think that David raises a few high points here: why do people need to assume that new technologies must resemble objects we are already familiar with? I believe that it would certainly make more sense to create, for example, robots which serve a particular purpose but do not necessarily confuse people by looking like them while behaving like zombies. People adjust rather quickly to new technologies. For example, my grandparents grew up without the slightest idea of what an Alexa could be. Now, they are familiar with the concept, they even know how to use such technology.
I definitely agree with his view that certain apps are unnecessary and could be substituted by enchanted objects. I wish I didn’t have to keep on checking my phone so often to either respond to messages or check the news but there are few alternatives if one cannot speak in a public space to Siri. However, I do not agree with all of the proposed ideas. I find the idea of a wallet which controls the outflow of money rather unnecessary as keeping track of one’s expenses with apps seems easier (at least to me). Maybe enchanted objects are not the best solution to each app-based action?
I also think that there are many potential issues with the pill bottle described by David because one does not always sit in the same room, which means that it may be easy to ignore such visual feedback. I guess that my criticism stems from the fact that I know many older people who relocate from time to time and hence, they do not necessarily keep they pill bottles in plain sight. Also, lifelogging praised by the presenter resembles one of the Black Mirror episodes. It’s slightly concerning how often he mentions that companies would benefit from our data.
Overall, I think that enchanted objects had enormous potential and that some of them could indeed be inspired by non-existent tech shown in sci-fi movies. However, we need to bear in mind that technology shown in films can frequently be based on tech unnecessarily resembling objects we are familiar with. I wish I could see more objects which can foster more human interactions, which could stimulate people intellectually and not merely feed us marketing information.