“I think some of them aren’t even physical rides, just virtual flythoughs.” (Doctorow 349)

Virtual seems to be perceived as less real. I can understand this way of looking at it, but I also see how the virtual world is entirely valid and real just as the physical world is. Is a virtual fly-through or view of something less valuable than a walk through of it? Some may argue yes. It’s true, there is something special about experiencing something physical but I don’t think this something special makes the physical more real.

“I’ve never seen any place designed the way I’d design one.  Maybe I’ll do that someday.” (Doctorow 297)

What would happen if everyone designed their own surroundings?  Design is something that takes a lot of thought and understanding of the object being designed.  Many people feel at some point in time that what’s in front of them is severely flawed and that they could do it better.  I believe that a designer’s expertise is essential to functionality and actually bringing something into being, but it is very important for a designer to understand how someone might want to use what they make and how to make it jive with the user.  The example in my head while I write this is the “my.evergreen.edu” page.  I find it to be far from straight forward or navigable.  The only reason I get use out of it now is because I have been instructed in specific ways to use it (which links to click).  While becoming familiar with this page I really felt I could have designed a better layout.  However, I know nothing about web design, so I believe my input would be most useful alongside an expert, rather than just on its own.

“Most world-dominating plans went sour, while a hefty proportion of modest plans to Make Something Cool actually worked out pretty well, paid the bills, and put food on the table.” (Doctorow 249)

Should we live with intention or just let things happen? How much say do we have in our path? If the ambitious plans to create something significant go “sour”, but tinkering around to just make something cool leads to success and food on the table, how can we trust our intentions will ever be met? According to the above quote, it seems like people have to avoid their goals in order to reach them which doesn’t make sense to me.

“But you can’t put everything under one banner—you can’t just declare to these people that their projects are ours—“ (Doctorow 217)

“Without a corporate entity, it’s like trying to herd cats.” (Doctorow 217)

These quotes make me think back to the documentary we watched in class about the industry of 3D printers and the process in which MakerBot essentially sold out and went from open source to closed source, putting the community’s collective work under MakerBot’s name.  Is it true that a community of individuals working for a movement is something that can’t be herded?  Do people need a leader in order to work towards something?  Perry tried so hard to share his idea with everyone and allow them to work off of it without being under Perry’s rule.  But when they faced trouble Perry had to take the leadership position in order to efficiently deal.  Is there any way around this?

“‘Bored,’ ‘Stiff,’ ‘Wanting to leave,’ ‘Intimidated,’ come the typical responses. It never occurs to them to change this very old school form unless they are explicitly invited to do so.” (Shapiro)

“So that the students see only a few backs of fellow students and the lonely expert in front” (Shapiro)

While reading the online article (especially the top quote), I found myself picturing a seminar where everyone is standing (or sitting if they choose to) and casually walking around shmoozing with each other as friends, discussing readings.  Maybe with a snack table and some punch.  I doubt there would be the seminar tension that comes from the tables and chairs.  It would most likely feel like a book club.  It makes me wonder if it would be as productive as a seminar.  When seminar gets off topic, however, it is one conversation that can be redirected.  With many people discussing the readings amongst themselves, it would be hard to notice or take action if conversations stray.

Then I think of this quote:

“The chairs were so ergonomic that they had zero adjustment controls, because they knew much better than you ever could how to arrange themselves for your maximum comfort.” (Doctorow 195)

In relating this scene in my head to the scene of the previous quote, I wonder if there will someday be a technology that knows how to arrange learning environments according to the individuals in the room.  Can technology really know us that well?  Is there any way for us to make it know us that well?

Can there be technology that listens to your body more than you do. Making decisions for us by understanding us better than we do, that looks like inventions/technology evolving past its makers.

“It made him smile.  Someone had invented this thing.  It could have been him.  He knew where you could download vision-system libraries, and force-feedback libraries.  He knew where you could get plans for the robotics, and off-the-shelf motors and sensors.  Christ, these days he had a good idea where you could get the ice cream wholesale, and which crooked vending-machine interests he’d have to grease to get his stuff into truck stops.” Doctorow (132)

In thinking about “the mind behind the artifact” (in this case the ice cream vending machine), we must think about the life of a person.  The quote above demonstrates so many pieces of prior knowledge.  This demonstration leads me to wonder about the instances in the maker’s life in which he learned these pieces of knowledge.  In order to make something do you have to know something?  Are these things slowly learned over time or can they be picked up quickly?  Is the knowledge information? skill? both?  Probably both and beyond.

Why do people want to learn 3D printing and how does “knowing 3D printing” compare to “knowing how to be a software engineer a few years ago”?

Taking this question literally, as I tend to do, I think knowing 3D printing—in the sense of designing something on a program and using a 3D printer to bring it to physical being—isn’t much different than knowing regular 2D printing a couple decades ago. I might also compare it to digital photography. I feel that the skill is in understanding how to use the program or to even build the printer and not how to plug a file into a machine.