Comments on: Architectures of control that actually endanger life

By: Unintended effects: blue lights vs heroin « Shakeout’s Blog

Unintended effects: blue lights vs heroin « Shakeout’s Blog — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:28:34 +0000

[...] few users (and those their actions affect) who ignore or bypass the control. This seems to be an architecture of control with the potential to endanger life, although the actual stated intention behind it probably includes ’saving [...]

By: Architectures of Control in Design » Spiked: When did ‘hanging around’ become a social problem?

Fri, 08 Sep 2006 12:17:41 +0000

[...] Anyway, Ms Appleton goes on to note a new tactic perhaps even more extreme than the Mosquito, and a sure candidate for my ‘designed to injure‘ category (perhaps not actually endangering life, but close): “Police in Weston-super-Mare have been shining bright halogen lights from helicopters on to youths gathered in parks and other public places. The light temporarily blinds them, and is intended to ‘move them on’, in the words of one Weston police officer.” [...]

By: Architectures of Control in Design » Planned addiction as a method of control: a parasitic lock-in business model

Fri, 08 Sep 2006 12:16:38 +0000

[...] The classification ‘architectures of control‘ ought rightly to include cigarettes alongside any other product designed to be addictive or to reinforce patterns of users’ behaviour. In this sense, any psychoactive drug intended to control/alter users’ behaviour must be considered part of the same phenomenon, certainly when it is created or administered with that specific intention. And of course, these are not just designed to be unpleasant, but designed to injure and endanger life (not until revenue’s been extracted, of course). [...]

By: Architectures of Control in Design » Telegraph - Safety fear swats store’s Mosquito

Mon, 10 Apr 2006 22:12:09 +0000

[...] It’s a similar approach to the use of blue lighting in nightclub and hospital toilets to make it more difficult for intravenous drug use to occur (veins no longer show up so well under the light). Given the danger of thus sticking the needle in the wrong place, taking it out, trying again, and so on, I think it’s fair to classify this as an architecture of control that can endanger life. [...]

By: Dane Brown

Dane Brown — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:57:38 +0000

I think that limiting access to a life saving device is absurd. An emergency can happen at any time and it should not be limited to only a select few. I also think things like speedbumps should be sacrificed because your trading one potential danger for another. This is a total measure of oppurtunity cost.