> Earlier this year I wrote about HCI as the intersection of technical
craft and social sciences. Interestingly the responses I got from
people in the HCI field was the inverse of the sentiment in this
article (...) I got pushback on that too.
Some things seem defined not just by intersection but by exclusion.
I've experienced both sides. As a computer scientist working in arts
and music, I find the "computer music" field builds on a strong
affinity. Technology and arts form a natural positive bond, although
one meets the occasional purist who only hand-carves their own
medieval flutes. It's a fusion intersection to which one can never
bring too much humanities nor science. I don't feel out of place
discussing philosophy and matrix multiplication in the same breath.
As I matured my interests post 2013 changed focus to digital rights
and cybersecurity. It seems to me this area is currently defined by
antagonism. It is a human-computer design field, yet is a chasm
between human values and rigid thinking where people and systems
clash.
In computer music, what is at stake is mostly joy. In cybersecurity
what is at stake is power. As in any struggle the technocrats just
wanna "hit them harder with more". More cryptography. More
lockdown. More central authority. The actual utility, or god forbid
'pleasure' of computing be damned.
But there is another movement emerging in cybersecurity, to which I am
affiliated. "Computing in the public interest", or "humanistic
computing", whatever you want to call it, where technical concerns are
fused on an equal basis with rights, freedoms and responsibilities.
Existing dead centre of that exclusion means getting push-back from
both sides. But, to be honest I take that as confirmation that the
work is fresh, valid, and essential.
Some things seem defined not just by intersection but by exclusion. I've experienced both sides. As a computer scientist working in arts and music, I find the "computer music" field builds on a strong affinity. Technology and arts form a natural positive bond, although one meets the occasional purist who only hand-carves their own medieval flutes. It's a fusion intersection to which one can never bring too much humanities nor science. I don't feel out of place discussing philosophy and matrix multiplication in the same breath.
As I matured my interests post 2013 changed focus to digital rights and cybersecurity. It seems to me this area is currently defined by antagonism. It is a human-computer design field, yet is a chasm between human values and rigid thinking where people and systems clash.
In computer music, what is at stake is mostly joy. In cybersecurity what is at stake is power. As in any struggle the technocrats just wanna "hit them harder with more". More cryptography. More lockdown. More central authority. The actual utility, or god forbid 'pleasure' of computing be damned.
But there is another movement emerging in cybersecurity, to which I am affiliated. "Computing in the public interest", or "humanistic computing", whatever you want to call it, where technical concerns are fused on an equal basis with rights, freedoms and responsibilities.
Existing dead centre of that exclusion means getting push-back from both sides. But, to be honest I take that as confirmation that the work is fresh, valid, and essential.