SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.
Successfully reported this slideshow.
Activate your 14 day free trial to unlock unlimited reading.
I would DiYSE for it! A manifesto for do-it-yourself internet-of-things creation
I would DiYSE for it! A manifesto for do-it-yourself internet-of-things creation
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
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
6.
Internet of things
• Connected world (Rubino, Hazenberg &
Huisman, 2012)
• Interactions between digital and non-digital
realms
• 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
16.
#2 “Support a spectrum of
expertise of computational
thinking by offering different
layers of computational
abstractions”
• 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 an
ecosystem to support people in
creating 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 system
offering playgrounds and
recycling 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 HCI
research
• appropriation, end user
programming (Dix, 2007;
Dourish, 1999)
• in a bottom up way
• integrating ‘things’
20.
“
You the people have the power, the
power to create machines, the
power to create happiness. - C.
Chaplin
”
21.
Dries De Roeck
dries.deroeck@artesis.be
@driesderoeck
www.designresearch.be
Editor's Notes
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
TARGET AUDIENCE : System creators, not users of the system\n