Category Archives: Conferences

Big Humanities workshop on Big Data



As the IEEE conference on Big Data moved into a new phase, an incredible collection of humanities and technology partners gathered to share stories of what big data means to them.

Ada Lovelace described herself as a poetical scientist and an Analyst. I would call her a storyteller and codifier. She was able to both tell stories and encode them in a repeatable note format… A father the poet and her mother the mathematician, she from an early age learnt to flit between writing and analysing…. She learnt how to communicate and write while applying logic an analysis. I’m a bit of a fan. My time travelling self would no doubt have fallen for the most important person in the history of computer science (I suspect it might have been love in just one direction – so let’s move on shall we, but before we do.. it’s worth noting (and this is steeling from a conversation from the met office disrupter Mike Saunby) that working with Babbage not only led to computer science it also led Joseph Whitworth devising standards (without standards you wouldn’t be able to replace a light bulb, tune a TV, listen to a record, drive a car, or take a medicine)…. But I digress. So what am I trying to say? I It’s this: that interdisciplinary across the humanities is not just a desirable thing, it is the life force of discovery that flows through human existence. And history continues to show us that when it happens then sparks (literally and metaphorically) will fly. Note: October the 15th is Ada Lovelace Day.

Getting back to the conference. It’s been a hard start, I won’t deny it (most least because the four people that might, just might read this blog have been incredibly patient with my rants about the lack of people… ). Today is another day all-together. Today I feel human. I feel connected. Today is different. I apologise for yesterday. No actually I don’t. I want to shout at being subjected to a difficult two days of struggling with poorly presented academic knowledge. Today is incredible.

In a wonderful interplay between acronyms and metaphors I have been delighted with the truly interdisciplinary work of technologists and humanities collaborating on meaningful human big data. Expressing doubt and confidence in equal measure. A dash of humour has been thrown in, but underneath has been a rolling and rising discourse about that has got not just under the meaning of digital humanities but has started to get under my skin. I want to know more.

What’s happened? What has happened is that Dr Tobias Blanke and Dr Mark Hedges King’s College London have put together a remarkable workshop on Big Humanities workshop

I want the reader to understand that the humanities presented was further from my academic knowledge than the computer science has been. Yet in this set of talks the computer science is so much more vivid and exciting. The canvas of humanities enables me to understand. I don’t know about Victorian poetry texts. Yet I could immerse myself in the understanding of a subject elegantly presented as a visual narrative…

The science appears richer, more understandable, further advanced and more meaningful when presented at the heart of humanities.

Technologists have not held back on owning their subject – OCR is thrown in next to NLP and Cluster Analysis. (And we don’t want this to stop – researchers need to use their languages if they are to give passionate academic talks). But maybe we need a guide? Some simple How, Why, What, Wows of big data computational techniques – why is Hadoop better for real-time analysis. What is OCR – how does it differentiate from pattern recognition. Etc. This isn’t a barrier – it’s an opportunity.

There have been a wealth of presentations – and you’ll have to go to the workshop organisers for academic knowledge on this. But some thoughts, insights and connections that I have had today go a bit like this.

“[A]t a time when the web is simultaneously transforming the way in which people collaborate and communicate, and merging the spaces which the academic and non-academic communities inhabit, it has never been more important to consider the role which public communities – connected or otherwise – have come to play.” (Dunn & Hedges, 2012”) ->here

Making Data Matter

Data mining the 1918 flu pandemic

Viral Networks in 19th Century Newspapers





In the closing comments a panel of speakers came together to start to discuss themes, thoughts and what-nexts for humanities.

I liked Andrew Prescott’s reflection as scholar, “As historians we don’t know who the user is. Is a curator a user?”. My thought on this is that we don’t need a new form of ‘user centred histories’, instead we should rethink how we collaborate. To embrace the idea of historians a participants in a co-design process. Has anyone done this? Are their persona’s documenting typical (or a-typical) historians? Are their design guidelines or ‘branding’ documents for working with history? Is this something we could look at? Would this make a working across disciplines an easier thing? Or am I just being another voice in a mix of ideas that is just finding its feet.

Another clear big difference in this workshop to the technology focussed workshops and talks was the variety of data. And while Variety is a core theme of IEEE Big Data, the definition of variety is actually pretty narrow in terms of the talks I saw. All of the talks mentioned variety and then went on to show something that handled numerical data in a structured database. In humanities it seems the problem is more complex, potentially much harder (for machines) and crosses time and materiality to connect with everywhere humans have made their mark. In these talks it included 19th century newspapers, interviews, travelogues, transcripts, photographs, films, guidebooks, poems, private letters, journals and novels. This richness of data makes the problem of data exponentially grow into new dimensions. There was a lot of talk about language and translation – which should be a reasonably trivial problem once it goes through google translate? Right? Yes, but does google translate have a setting for 17th century vernacular? Does it have a setting for how a small community in the Lake District describe their world? And how often does language change? How many time zones do we need to encode to capture textual data? The problem was big data and now, I really don’t know what kind of data it is. But isn’t that the deal – it is at this very point of dealing with data, when your head spins and your hard drive melts that you know you’re dealing with something that’s possible bigger than big data?

At times the excitement in the room morphed into nervousness. Is this to big? And just like our friends in IEEE who worry about the end of Moore’s law, the humanities were asking ss this the end of theory? No said Barry Smith, “We must be prepared for failure. As Beckett said: fail and fail better”. He then went on the remind us that “it’s not the first time we’ve had big data. It’s happened before and we must understand the future from the past”.

As someone pointed out in the audience: there is going to be a huge argument in the humanities…

And as Christie Walker from the AHRC closed things off with: “It’s going to be great fun to stand back and see what happens”. That indeed it is.


SXSW 2012


The Question:
Can Printed Electronics Save the Music Industry?

The Panel:
Jon Rogers, Pete Thomas, Tommy Perman, Kate Stone and Kenny Anderson.

The Discussion:

At SXSW we discussed how printed electronics could save digital music in the context of connecting communities to record labels and artists.

Printed Electronics is an emerging technology with the potential to change how we interact. We can now reliably print basic electronic components onto paper and card; and when connected to conventional electronics, has the potential to re-connect digital to physical for album covers, fanzines, merchandise, and getting new music heard.

We raised questions of what does digital mean to independent hyper-local record labels that want to connect with their community and how bespoke digital printed electronics on paper could achieve this and alter the future of digital music and how artists can connect to people.

You can listen to the full discussion here.

The Prototypes:

Mixer Release: This object looks like a 7” record release, but has no vinyl. It instead has an inbuilt mp3 player that the user can remix using a paper mixer built into the sleeve. This object was created to start discussions around piracy; what if there was no definitive version of a song.

Night/Day Release – This object is a CD sized card case release that has a built in mp3 player. The lyrics to the song change depending on light levels, if it’s dark then its explicit, and if it’s light then its child friendly. This object was exploring how music can be reactive to its surroundings.

‘Wireless’ is a paper radio!  It pulls audio content from the internet and plays it back on a piece of paper.  This particular prototype is ‘powered’ by audioBoo and plays audio tagged with #sxpaperapps.

This is an experience prototype of a potential future scenario, and as such, a few non-printed components have been used. In the not so distant future we’ll be able to print the audio speakers and print the silicon required for the chips. Importantly though, the backend of the touchpoints (‘buttons’) is conductive ink, so the user experience is as true as it would be if all of the technology was printed onto the paper using conventional printing presses.


MSC Invite – This invite was printed with conductive ink. When plugged in at the event the invite is turned into a musical instrument. This invite was created to add value to a normal piece of paper with very little expense.

Mike demoing some of the prototypes after the panel.

Paper Headphones – These headphones come in an A2 poster format, but can be popped out and built up into paper headphones. 100 of these were produced to test out the current efficiency of batch production.

Interact 2011

In September, Paul and Larissa from the research studio attended the Interact 2011 conference held in Lisbon. Larissa took part in the Doctoral Consortium and a full paper was presented by Paul as part of the user experience track titled Structuring the Collaboration of Multiple Novice Design Ethnographers: Towards a New User Research Approach. The presentation itself went well with some great follow-up questions highlighting things to address with the next iteration of  the approach.

Other stand out talks from the conference were:

Helmes, J. et al., 2011. Meerkat and Tuba: Design Alternatives for Randomness, Surprise and Serendipity in Reminiscing.

Presented by John Helmes, Microsoft Research Cambridge. Meerkat is a semi-autonomous robot that has 3 LCD screens on a robotic arm that pops up and shows combinations of photos from the user’s computer. Its behaviour appears agitated if it is ignored and conversely gets bored when it is used too much. Tuba is a flip up device that changes to random content each time it is rotated. This could be playing music, showing photos, Facebook statuses or just simple fun facts. A scraper sits on the user’s computer and gathers the content from a specified set of sources. Both projects provoked interesting questions around the relationships people have with devices in the home and types of content people are willing to have on semi-public display.

Smyth, M., Speed, C. & Brynskov, M., 2011. Critical Design :: Is It Just Designers Doing Ethnography or Does It Offer Something More for Interaction Design?

The panel was a little poorly attended due to bad location and lack of promotion from the organisers but the discussion that ensued was thought provoking nonetheless. Some interesting tensions arose between the approaches of critical design and participatory design for engaging the public in decision-making in relation to new planning projects. Many of the concepts critical design proposes are frequently inaccessible to anyone not literate in this highbrow language of understanding design. Also, participatory design seeks to involve people in the design process but this then somtimes leads to an obligation to pursue the ideas people have helped to generate.

Norman, D, 2011. Industrial Programme Secret Keynote

Don Norman gave an informal stand-up keynote without any slides in the alternative conference location at the Hotel Marquês de Sá. He spoke about the research-practice gap in relation to research groups within companies and their need to align themselves better with the product groups. He also spoke about the need for more HCI people with MBAs so that they have a much more powerful voice within companies in comparison to the marketing or engineers who can always justify their reasoning by focusing on cost.

Aliakseyeu, D., Du, J., et al., 2011. Exploring Interaction Strategies in the Context of Sleep.

Admittedly, this talk from Dzmitry of Philips Research did have a few people yawning but not due to a poor presentation. It was because the content dealt with the relatively unexplored area of sleep. This first covered the social, psychological and physiological aspects of sleep then went on to propose opportunities for interaction design in this space.

Greenberg, S., 2011. Opportunities for Proxemic Interactions in Ubicomp (Keynote).

The keynote from Saul Greenberg provided the most depth out of all the keynote speakers at the conference. He discussed a proxemic ecology (a term originally coined by Edward Hall) in relation to ubiquitous computing. This is a way of thinking about all of the devices people interact with and how their proximity to them should change the way those devices behave. Such ecology includes non-digital physical artifacts, portable media devices, people, large-display surfaces and information appliances. He closed his talk by discussing challenges including the HCI field’s ever-utopian ideals and lack of engagement with ethical issues. He used the example of looking back on the literature on hypertext and how it includes no references to porn, gambling, e-commerce or advertising.

Dalsgaard, P., Dindler, C. & Halskov, K., 2011. Understanding the Dynamics of Engaging Interaction in Public Spaces.

One of the best talks of the conference discussing 3 case studies – a Lego augmented reality app in a retail store, a ‘hydroscope’ interactive installation based in an aquarium and a media façade called Aarhus by Light. These studies were used to develop a framework for aspects of engagement for in public spaces, which were content, physical, social and cultural. More info available at

Vision Plus Conference at NID

I had a fantastic trip to the National Institute of Design (NID) hosted by Praveen Nahar and MP Ranjan. I was there to chat about how design can work with healthcare systems, but became involved with the Vision Plus Conference – giving a talk on Bespoke on the first day.

Some great insights – my favourite quote was from Ranjan in response to a talk on sanitation in India that was a little heavy on data and less on delivery (although the speaker did say it was the start of the project…) – “There is evidence-based design and design-based evidence and they are two sides of the river. How can we build bridges?”.

(I even got a little time for a spot of Christmas shopping with one of Praveen’s students taking me around Ahmebadad on an auto-rickshaw).


Story Cultures – Presentation at UbiComp 2010

I had the opportunity to present my work at the Digital Object Memories (DOMe) workshop held in conjunction with the Ubicomp 2010 Conference in Copenhagen on September 26. The theme of this year’s workshop was the Internet of Things (IoT) and I presented the short paper Story Cultures: understanding how stories of different cultures can influence digital memories, which discussed implications of object-memory systems on human relations, and on peoples’ relations to objects. The workshop brought together top researchers and practitioners who are interested in both the technical and applied aspects of Ubiquitous Computing technologies.