From poup@mic.atr.co.jp Mon May 18 08:54:58 1998 Received: from burdell.cc.gatech.edu (root@burdell.cc.gatech.edu [130.207.3.207]) by lennon.cc.gatech.edu (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id IAA02875 for ; Mon, 18 May 1998 08:54:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wheaten.hitl.washington.edu ([128.95.73.60]) by burdell.cc.gatech.edu (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id IAA26042 for ; Mon, 18 May 1998 08:54:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailhost.mic.atr.co.jp (mic.atr.co.jp [133.186.20.201]) by wheaten.hitl.washington.edu (8.8.8/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA10766 for <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu>; Mon, 18 May 1998 05:54:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.mic.atr.co.jp by mailhost.mic.atr.co.jp (8.8.8+2.7Wbeta7/3.6W) id VAA00306; Mon, 18 May 1998 21:54:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from mic.atr.co.jp by pop.mic.atr.co.jp (8.8.8+2.7Wbeta7/3.6W04/07/98) id VAA20959; Mon, 18 May 1998 21:54:13 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <35610F3E.13390A58@mic.atr.co.jp> Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 21:49:02 -0700 From: Ivan Poupyrev Organization: MIC Labs, ATR International X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 3D UI list <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu> Subject: Fwd: Ben Shneiderman article Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO This article was forwarded into the HIT Lab internal mail few days ago. After reading it I thought it might be interesting for people on 3Dui list too. In this article Ben Shneiderman is arguing that computers should not mimic people. Similarly, we can argue (and, in fact, many argued including myself) that virtual worlds, whether immersive or desktop, should not necessary mimic the real world. And here comes an interesting bit: since real world is the only world we know, how can we build virtual environments and 3D interfaces that are _not_ based on reality? Ivan > From Suzanne Weghorst: > > A GRANDER GOAL: > A THOUSAND-FOLD INCREASE IN HUMAN CAPABILITIES > > Ben Shneiderman Director, Human-Computer Interaction Lab > Professor, Computer Science > University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 > > 301-405-2680 ben @cs.umd.edu http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/hcil > > Educom Review, 32, 6 (Nov/Dec 1997), 4-10. > Copyright 1997 EDUCOM, Reprinted with permission. > > The public furor over chessmaster Garry Kasparov's loss to IBM's Deep Blue > computer revealed the shallow perception that some people have of the > differences between people and computers. Their false assumptions would be > merely amusing if it were not for the prevalence and influence of such > notions. The astounding and mind-opening reality is simple: people are not > computers and computers are not people. > > The 1947 press conference presenting the ENIAC computer launched the > metaphor of the giant electronic brain, and many people have maintained that > simplistic concept. While it may be useful as inspiration for some new > ideas, it is startling to see how long some people have held on to the > childish Mimicry Game, when there are grander goals to pursue. > > The Mimicry Game -- construction of computers to carry out human tasks or > behave like humans -- was long ago shown to be misleading, except for > crash-test dummies and Disney's audio-animatronic figures. Lewis Mumford, > in his 1934 classic book on *Technics and Civilization*, described the > "obstacle of animism" and pointed out that no mature technology resembles > human form. Cars do not run with feet, tape recorders do not speak with an > artificial larynx, and chess programs do not think with a brain. Deep > Blue's programmers deserve credit for their accomplishment, but the computer > is merely a tool with no more intelligence than a wooden pencil. > > The circus-like match between Kasparov and Deep Blue was great entertainment > for those who like contests. It has as much scientific importance as P. T. > Barnum's bearded lady. The chess-playing hardware extensions and software > are so specialized that they seem unlikely to influence other applications. > In fact, IBM's Web site avoids mentioning such spin-offs and deflects the > reader by pointing out that Deep Blue's standard hardware is also employed > for other useful tasks. No spin-off, just spin. > > Some scientists, journalists and other industry experts have viewed the > Mimicry Game as the ultimate goal of computer science, the Holy Grail. This > initially compelling dream draws people in, like a bright spotlight -- so > alluring that they miss grander goals. We now smile at the quaint but > failed designs: five-fingered robot arms that swiveled only 270 degrees, > talking cars or soda machines, and more recent disasters such as Postal > Buddy (a $1 billion anthropomorphic postal machine) or Microsoft's BOB (a > "social interface" with 14 cute characters to guide users). > > The reality is that users don't want an electronic buddy or chatty bank > machine. On the first encounter such a machine seems cute, the second time > silly, and the third an annoying distraction from the task. Users want > powerful tools that amplify their capabilities and enable them to do their > tasks. A grander goal for computer scientists and technology designers is > to give users a thousand-fold increase in their capabilities. > > Beyond the Mimicry Game > > Bulldozers amplify our abilities to do physical work, and airplanes enable > us to travel much faster and higher than the birds. Calculators are useful > because they enable us to find square roots or to do other chores a thousand > times faster and more accurately than on our own. The World Wide Web, > digital libraries, and newsgroups are attractive because they enable users > to find information and communicate with people a thousand times faster than > other media. Desktop publishing, medical imaging, and computer-assisted > design software are used because they give users almost supernatural powers. > > Computer science's goals should not be to create medical diagnosis programs > that perform as well as the best doctor -- that is the Mimicry Game. A > grander goal is to enable the average physician to perform diagnoses far > better than even the best physician. This can be accomplished by creating > comprehensive clinical databases of patient histories, validated simulation > models of disease patterns, and groupware to allow easy consultation. If > you are brought to an emergency room anywhere in the world, your medical > records should be available within 15 seconds. > > Races between horses and iron horses or between people and computers are > fine entertainment, but the thrill of victory and the satisfaction of > accomplishing meaningful tasks are uniquely human. > > Designing for the Future > > Many designers are so entranced by the Mimicry Game that they find it hard > to break the spell. They cannot see past the alluring Star Trek scenarios > or the compelling fantasy of HAL in Arthur C. Clarke's 2001. While > designers may accept notions of empowering users, they need more than > encouragement to apply tool-like strategies. Designers need a fresh > philosophical foundation, novel design patterns, and specific metaphors to > help them create the interfaces and visualizations that will be compelling > to users. > > A philosophical foundation might be fashioned around the cognitive > objectives of comprehensible, predictable and controllable interfaces and > the affective goals of mastery, satisfaction and responsibility. I believe > that users want comprehensible systems in which they understand the features > and can readily take action to complete their tasks. The interfaces should > be predictable, so that users know what to expect when they press Return, > and controllable so that they can realize their intentions, monitor their > progress, and recover from errors. These cognitive attributes lead to a > sense of mastery over the system and pride in accomplishment. Then users > can feel responsible for their actions. Such responsibility is necessary in > life-critical applications such as air traffic control, and highly valued in > common office or educational systems. > > The design patterns that arise from this philosophical foundation include > the direct manipulation style and visual information seeking. The 15-year > old description of direct manipulation is still valid: > > Visual presentation of the world of action: show users the available > objects and actions > Rapid, incremental, and reversible actions with 100-millisecond updates > Selection by pointing, not typing > Continuous visual display of status > > These principles are embodied in the Macintosh and later graphical user > interfaces, air traffic control, videogames, and other successful products. > The Visual Information Seeking mantra extends these principles to database > browsing: > > Overview first, zoom and filter, then details-on-demand > > In several projects over the past six years (www.cs.umd.edu/projects/hcil) > we had to relearn this principle, so I wrote it down to solidify it in my > mind. Users should be able to see the full database, the table of contents, > or the course outline to orient themselves first. Then they can zoom in on > what they want, filter out what they don't want, and navigate to get the > specific details. > > New Metaphors > > New metaphors are emerging, especially from information visualization > research. The starfield display is one successful approach: a > two-dimensional scattergram showing thousands of color-, size-, and shape- > coded data points, with zooming navigation and sliders to filter out > unwanted data points. This was originated in the Human-Computer Interaction > Lab's HomeFinder and FilmFinder (Figure 1) projects and has become > commercialized in Spotfire (www.ivee.com). For tree-structured data, the > traditional node and link diagrams can now be shown with zooming and > filtering, or the novel treemap with nested color- and size-coded rectangles > can reveal patterns or outliers. For temporal data, Xerox PARC's > perspective wall, Yale computer science professor David Gelernter's > LifeStreams, or our LifeLines can be used to tell life histories or show > medical records. > > The excitement of discovery is substantial in many research labs, but there > is turbulence as designers break free from older metaphors. Paradigm shifts > have strong undertows that generate resistance to change. However, the goal > of improving human capabilities a thousand-fold will bring a tidal wave of > creative technologies. Since these innovations can be dangerous in many > ways, we will also need to teach and interpret Lewis Mumford's wisdom, > reminding these new creators that the purpose of technology is to "serve > human needs." > > Figure 1: The FilmFinder prototype enabled users to get an overview first, > and then focus on what they wanted using the zoombars on the left and > bottom. They could filter using the alphasliders to select actors or > directors, or the double-box slider to limit the length of films. Category > buttons on the bottom allowed further filtering of the color coded data > points. Finally, users could click on any data point to get a pop-up > information box that offered details-on-demand (C. Ahlberg & B. Shneiderman, > ACM CHI94 Conference Proceedings) > > ftp://ftp.cs.umd.edu/pub/hcil/Screen-dumps/Film/film-alldots.gif > ftp://ftp.cs.umd.edu/pub/hcil/Screen-dumps/Film/film-michele.gif > > ------------------ > > Ben Shneiderman is professor of computer science and director of the > Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory at the University of Maryland, College > Park. He is the author of the recently published third edition of > *Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer > Interaction *(Addison Wesley Longman Publishers, 1998). ben@cs.umd.edu > > -30- -- Ivan Poupyrev [poup@isl.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/poup@hitl.washington.edu] Researcher, MIC Lab, ATR International, Japan 0774-951432] Ph. D. Candidate, ISL, Hiroshima University, Japan 0824-212959] Visiting Scientist, HITL, University of Washington, US 206-6161474] http://www.hitl.washington.edu/people/poup]