Not to take away from what is being done in this project, but I had to read the HN comments to figure out that this was a set of software for printers.
The project could really use some better copy on the landing page.
The project could really use some better copy on the landing page.
It is an art project, an "artistic operating system", originally an assignment for design students, possibly a cruel joke, a "statement".
It's a peculiar failure of comprehension to look at all of that, wonder what it is, then find the software part and come back to the software developer website to report that it is "a set of software for printers".
Like a textile specialist staring at a painting for days, not getting it, then finally looking at the back side and, relieved, going back to report to the Textile News readership that it's a linen canvas, stretched and decorated on one side.
...and then suggesting they really should mount it on the wall the other way so people can more easily see what it is.
I for one think it's extremely unfortunate that no one bothered to tell them what a Telex was.... Could have saved the team a lot of trouble.
It's artistic because it's designed to make you think about different ways of interacting with technology. It is a choice to build a system under imposed constraints, which the Telex obviously was not.
So, while I agree with you, it really doesn’t undermine OP at all. Especially as it’s common to see people get value from that response; we see creators quite often personally respond with “oh, crap, I didn’t realize, let me work on that.”
My own depiction figures a slew of packing-taped barcodes on the tables and walls serve as references (links, shortcuts, scripts). So, the worst part is probably that organization abstractions are only accessible through the printer... a very slow command line... could be worse. But, I haven’t a clue how any of this stuff is developed without screens.
The landing page isn't helping their cause. The "slow food" concept works great for food, but sorry, it just doesn't translate to "slow computing."
Looking a bit closer, this seems to be a design challenge/experiment. Not intended to be practical, but more like a provocative exercise in new possibilities. I actually like it. It is good to try-on half baked ideas sometimes.
I think it does. If you can remember the Macintosh before the days of the MultiFinder, you ran one application at a time. The interface was simple, and you had to focus on the task at hand. Distractions were limited to any Desk Accessories you might have.
Ok, you did have a screen, but I think it is a good analogue to the Slow Food concept and has its own advantages over the interfaces we use today.
> It is constructed using free/libre/open hard- and software components, especially for print, databases, web-scraping and tangible interaction.
> Currently, it exists as a working prototype with software "bureaus" which allow a user to read and navigate news, web sites and social media entirely with the use of various printers for output and a barcode scanner for input.
That's really not clear. Also, your "if you're not reading the copy but instead comments" thing was both snarky and incorrect. Both are fine, but it's not recommended to be both disagreeable and wrong at the same time.
"Another aspect of contemporary screen-based culture is the constant psychic conflict often referred to as the 'Attention Economy'. In just trying to watch one YouTube video, a typical user is confronted with dozens of other appeals to focus somewhere else: comments, ratings, related videos, advertisements, video responses, etc. Because screen-based interaction is premised on temporal immediacy, we are, as users forced into a state of hyper-attention where we must constantly fight against the, largely commercial, attempts to make us look at something else. When we remove the screen (and by necessity, simplify the interface) we introduce a new form of temporality, where the speed of interaction might more accurately reflect our ability to perceive and understand information."
For example:
Because screen-based interaction is premised on temporal immediacy, we are, as users forced into a state of hyper-attention where we must constantly fight against the, largely commercial, attempts to make us look at something else
While I personally like the way this sentence is written, and is similar to my natural writing style, it's not easy to parse.
It could have as easily been written as:
"For most people, the time they spend on the computer is littered with distractions, and intentionally so, as corporations want to capture your attention by suggesting another video, viewing more content or offering a shiny ad."
You keep the emotion and information (lossy), but make it easier to read.
> ... Don't be snarky...
It's quite obvious that the landing page _isn't_ clear to a lot of people (including me). If you understood it with perfect clarity, good for you! Why not help explain it for others instead of being snarky?