1.
I would DiYSE for it!A manifesto for do-it-yourself internet-of-things creation Dries De Roeck Artesis University College Antwerp Karin Slegers CUO | Social Spaces, KULeuven/iMinds Johan Criel Marc Godon Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs Laurence Clayes Katriina Kilpi iMinds-SMIT, VUB An Jacobs

2.
DiYSE• Do-it-Yourself Smart Experiences• www.dyse.org 2

3.
Do it Yourself• Maker movement• Digital platforms facilitate (Gauntlett,2011)• Community aspect (Kuznetsov & Paulos,2010)• Bottom up design• ‘User’ is in control C. Anderson - Makers: The new industrial revolution

4.
5

5.
6

6.
Internet of things• Connected world (Rubino, Hazenberg &Huisman, 2012)• Interactions between digital and non-digitalrealms• Should not be limited to tech savvy people Image by www.metaproducts.nl

7.
Gartner hype cycle, updated july 2011 – www.gartner.com

8.
Risk of internet of things creation• Technology driven• People are not in control• Meaningful products are crucial • ‘Context aware’ does not cover meaning • People define the meaning of a context (Heidegger)•Digital affinity tends to be a prerequisite •Neglecting of everyday life

9.
Why a manifesto• Maker & DIY tradition • iFixit Self-Repair Manifesto (2010) • The Maker’s Bill of Rights (2006)• Description of an ideal system• Based on user insights iFixit Self-Repair Manifesto, 2010

10.
Manifesto origins• Qualitative data analysis • 30 users • 8 month period • 3 activities (group & individual)• User groups • Social crafters • Families • IT enthusiasts • Social (h)activists

11.
Diary & interviews• Semi structured• Current DIY practises• Frame of reference 14

12.
Creation kit• Technology abstraction• Lillidot concept• Concept definition 15

13.
16

14.
Mock-up sensors• More constraints• Abstraction levels• Case driven• Communicate & make a guide 17

15.
18

16.
#2 “Support a spectrum ofexpertise of computationalthinking by offering differentlayers of computationalabstractions”• Amateurs, Pro-am & professionals (Leadbeater, 2004)• Levels of creativity (Sanders & Stappers, 2008)• Potential of technology abstraction (Grufberg, 2011)• Observation • “What comes naturally to one, may be foreign to another”

17.
#4 “Not teach how to program,but should provide anecosystem to support people increating ideas or solutions”• Meta-Design (Fischer, 2004)• Open Design (Avital, de Mul, 2011)• Observation • Product definition & idea generation is possible • “If I need something done with electronics, I call an expert”

18.
#6 “Be a cradle-to-cradle systemoffering playgrounds andrecycling belts”• Pottering (Taylor, 2008)• ‘Process is more important than outcome’ (Mau, 1998)• Observation • Freedom to begin and to end without finishing • Doing things to learn about other things • No planned goal

19.
Discussion & conclusion• Rich contextual framework • For system creators• Guidelines for an ideal system• Evaluation • Existing and new systems• Complements related HCIresearch • appropriation, end user programming (Dix, 2007; Dourish, 1999) • in a bottom up way • integrating ‘things’

20.
“You the people have the power, thepower to create machines, thepower to create happiness. - C.Chaplin ”

21.
Dries De Roeckdries.deroeck@artesis.be @driesderoeck www.designresearch.be