Comments on: Review: Everyware by Adam Greenfield

By: Clément H.

Clément H. — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 13:21:19 +0000

Bonjour,

I’m a french design student,and just would like to know the sense of this bug ‘naÃ¯ve’ (in the last part of the text).

Thank you

By: Ramlah

Ramlah — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 04:43:30 +0000

Im ramlah..my problem is, lot of time i read thesis 43 in everywhere book ..but im still can’t understand…can u help me…

By: Dan Lockton: A Fanatic About Architectures of Control » Fanatic Attack

Dan Lockton: A Fanatic About Architectures of Control » Fanatic Attack — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:55:58 +0000

[...] One example that he uses to show control in urban environments includes the following: For example, paving an area with pebbles to make it uncomfortable for barefoot protesters to congregate – U Texas, Austin and a system which curtails a targeted individual’s mobility by remotely disabling a public transport pay-card have very different specific strategies, but the overall intention in both cases is to restrict access based on some characteristic of the user, whether it’s bare feet or some data field in an ID system. In one case the intended ’strength’ of the method is fairly weak (it’s more about discouragement); in the other the intended strength is high: this individual’s freedom must be curtailed, and attempted circumvention must be detected [links and emphasis are Lockton’s]. [...]

By: Architectures of Control in Design » Reversing the emphasis of a control environment

Mon, 16 Oct 2006 23:43:08 +0000

[...] Probably wouldn’t get away with that sort of thing at an airport any more anyway, but what will happen to this kind of informal gathering in the era of the societies of control? When everyware monitors exactly who’s where and forces the barriers closed for anyone hoping to use the space for something other than that for which it was intended? Please share this!These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]

By: Architectures of Control in Design » Review: We Know What You Want by Martin Howard

Tue, 03 Oct 2006 21:35:32 +0000

[...] The ‘remote nervous system manipulation’ patents of Hendricus Loos (which I previously mentioned here and here, having first come across them back in 2001) are explained together with a whole range of other patents detailing methods of controlling individuals’ behaviour, from the more sinister, e.g. remotely altering brain waves (PDF link, Robert G Malech, 1976) to the merely irritating (methods for hijacking users’ browsers and remotely changing the function of commands – Brian Shuster, 2002/5) and even a Samsung patent (1995) which involves using a TV’s built-in on-screen display to show adverts for a few seconds when the user tries to switch the TV off. [...]

By: Mark Beveridge » Blog Archive » Review - “Everyware”

Mark Beveridge » Blog Archive » Review - “Everyware” — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:11:43 +0000

[...] Dan Lockton [Found via Tom Coates] reviews Adam Greenfield’s recent book “Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing“, on his blog (or as Dan says, “discusses some of the ideas”), and then again on Amazon UK, and concludes : Overall, this is a most impressive book which clearly leads the reader through the implications of ubiquitous computing, and the issues surrounding its development and deployment in a very logical style…. Greenfield’s book is an excellent primer on the subject which ought to be on every designer’s bookshelf [...]

By: Architectures of Control in Design » Transcranial magnetic stimulation

Architectures of Control in Design » Transcranial magnetic stimulation — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 22:45:23 +0000

[...] In my review of Adam Greenfield’s Everyware a couple of months ago, I mentioned – briefly – the work of Hendricus Loos, whose series of patents cover subjects including “Manipulation of nervous systems by electric fields”, “Subliminal acoustic manipulation of nervous systems”, “Magnetic excitation of sensory resonances” and “Remote magnetic manipulation of nervous systems”. A theme emerges, of which this post by Tom Coates at Plasticbag.org reminded me: “There was one speaker at FOO this year that would literally have blown my brain away if he’d happened to have had his equipment with him. Ed Boyden talked about transcranial magnetic stimulation – basically how to use focused magnetic fields to stimulate sections of the brain and hence change behaviour. He talked about how you could use this kind of stimulation to improve mood and fight depression, to induce visual phenomena or reduce schizophrenic symptoms, hallucinations and dreams, speed up language processing, improve attention, break habits and improve creativity. [...]

By: Todd Sieling

Todd Sieling — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 14:06:18 +0000

Great review, btw! I’m going to pick up a copy of this as it sounds like a real thought churner.

By: Todd Sieling

Todd Sieling — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 14:04:55 +0000

> Is it ridiculous to suggest that a population whose stress levels (and other biological indicators) are being constantly, automatically monitored, could equally well be calmed, ‘reassured’, subdued and controlled by everyware embedded in the environment designed for this purpose?

Jacques Ellul would have thought the opposite, I think, in that keeping people out of these states as much as possible is what provides a better measure of state control. He described the desired state as one of constant stress, where the impulse to act is constant and constantly stifled, except where desired by the state. Rousing such populations to concentrated political action (protest, war) is much easier to do when they are already on edge and looking for a sanctioned outlet than trying to build the fervor from a calm state of mind.