Material Design

Materials from earth are one of the most reproduced patterns that are available in vinyl, wallpaper, laminate, plastic and so on. If marble is too expensive it is possible to replaced it either in sophisticated plastic or perfectly “stickable” vinyl. Through digital interfaces materiality slowly lost its sensorial experience, given by its surface quality, for its visual one, given by its images, to the extent that Digital Materiality is a more appropriate concept that applies to out age.
In its I/O conference Google openly talked about Material Design as a pixel with its own material qualities, which in my view, trespassed the threshold of a new kind of sensorial experience of matter, by adding a fourth dimensional is described as: “What if pixels didn’t just have color, but also depth?” he asked. “What if there was a material that was as simple as paper but could transform and change shape in response to touch?” To that end, Material Design will allow designers to define an elevation for every pixel. In turn, those elevations will trigger shadows that let multiple cards to layer over one another in an easy-to-intuit way 

Surface is no longer the least and last property any kind of material has; your 4D personal experience will assign any material its own property.


Freedom of choice


The emerging Internet of Things raises questions about the individual freedom of ‘real’ choices. If each single moment of our body is tracked in the perpetual competition of everyday life – whether with yourself, your family of, yes, also your neighbourhood – for an apparent improvement of performances, how much will it be left to any form of individual decisions? If the way we brush teeth, eat, sleep and so on, is tracked to sent data off to the market, where is our individuality? Is still individuality a concept belonging to the 2.0 society?

Public Space: spikes and anti-skate benches

Recent news talked about “spikes” emerging from London pedestrians to contain, or better deter, the use of ‘public’ pavement from homeless actions.

Similarly the Camden Council commissioned a series of ‘public’ benches, which apparently block any kind of graffiti and skateboard action. I am sure that the young men interviewed in this video didn’t get it. Apparently there is a supposed-to-be use of public, which is allowed, and a do-not-even-think-about it behaviour.

On the opposite hand the public sphere of the social media still allows to entertain a tiny bit more of freedom of expression, which can get the way around of some political restrictions and perforate the wall of ‘represented’ lies that surround us, which are sometimes made of the same stone of Camden benches.

My hope is that sometime in the next future the digital breach of the wall of lies (or Ideology as Slavoj Žižek might call it) can also perform within the space of the realm public domain.

Bignami knowledge

The Economist published an article about the emerging profession of the “explainer”, i.e. somebody whose job is describing what things mean. To some extent I can understand why such profession is taking over the 2.0 Society. Information runs too fast and things get obsolete equally fast. If you don’t get a continuous and never ending update you might get lost in the Cloud of data.

Apple at its WWDC14 opened up to developers to create new visual and easy catching technology so that users can more easily and intuitively interact with the Cloud of Data without even knowing it.

When I was at school and I didn’t have time, and will, to study and properly research something, I would have the option to go for a Bignami, which basically makes abstracts of any kind of knowledge known in this world. Of course I knew it was a rough abstract, which didn’t offer me anything else that a brief and quick info, far away from anything close to “learning” and “knowledge”.

Is our society going towards the Bignami direction?

Will knowledge be just an oligarchic entity reserved for those that want to try a little more to understand what happens everyday?