Propose your solution
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
Auzy
wrote on the 29 Aug 08 at 00:12
|
|
|
Once again, I totally agree wit this idea. We need a parallel distro that is targeting cutting edge technologies for experimentation. Many linux users I have noticed often don't recognise some ideas as good until after they get implemented. Happens all the time!
Big +1. It also means developers such as myself are encouraged to work on projects, and get them included for testing by the general community, so that we know if they are worth pursuing.
|
|
|
I know every hates comparing to Apple, but there are tons of story's where they did crazy things just on a whim, and a lot of times they went nowhere, but that doesn't mean you don't learn things by doing them.
Break the cycle. Be different. Go crazy. Don't be afraid to waste tons of time and fail miserably. Experiment.
|
|
|
Hey (I just had an idea),
We can start these kinds of projects at Ubuntu our selves.
There is little stopping getting things started.
You could use the Ubuntu Launchpad PPA webspace to start your project.
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+ppas
Just start the project, invite people to join, work on the various separate aspects (desktop, system, etc), and make the results available for download.
If it gets good results, then Ubuntu may add it to the repository, or even build it into the distro.
Just challenging the assumptions -
Just because it is not being done already, doesn't mean it "can't" be done.
|
|
|
@Tree MendUs: While you raise a good and valid point, I can't help but feel this idea needs more spotlight and more push behind it.
What I mean to say is that well before we even think about code, we need to *rethink* what kind of dialogue we want to foster between the system and the user.
Linux (and unix) was built from the bare metal up. By the time it reached userland and GUI-space, it sadly seemed like the innovation well had run dry.
What we need is a new system that is built on placing the user's experience at the core of all the happens. We need a 'meeting of the minds' of usability prodigies. We need product brainstorming on the level of companies like Ideo (http://www.ideo.com/) - think iPhone. Finally, we need a bold, functional, inspired design that makes onlookers say 'I never thought a computer could be used like that!"
|
|
Auzy
wrote on the 29 Aug 08 at 07:22
|
|
|
|
@Tree. One problem we have though is that PPA is dependant on the quality of descriptions. Our real problem is that as mentioned, users need to try stuff to know what they are really like.
|
|
|
@ Ubun2ideas and Auzy
I well agree with you guys.
e.g.
1) we need to *rethink* what kind of "dialogue" we want to "foster" ...
(note additional quotes for emphasis)
Yes, I think it would be really handy to have a forum available for each project on PPA. The brainstorm comments system is sometimes mor of a forum, but difficult to have separate threads on sub topics (minor points).
2) the user's experience "and objectives" at the core of all the happens - it's not just about looking and feeling good, it's about get jobs done easily, efficiently, fast and reliably well done.
3) "We need product brainstorming".
One of my suggestions has been to make brainstorming available to any PPA project, specifically for any project that wants a brainstorm.
see ;
Idea #11704: Make Brainstorm available to all the PPA Software Projects at Launchpad.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/11704/
4) "we need a bold, functional, inspired design"
Not just for "a design" of user experience, but also for the way(s) and methods used to design it.
This is one of the great things about Brainstorm, is that it opens up for user led development, and can garner feedback on what might be a suitable approach - even before any work has begun on a solution.
Better and more flexible polling (voting/survey) systems, would also help gage market acceptance of a project, and help determine what are worthwhile projects to get started asap.
5) "One problem we have though is that PPA is dependent on the quality of descriptions."
I am not sure that it Is a problem.
PPA provides space for a project. A project can have more than one solution being worked on - concurrent solutions are possible (but not often talked about). It allows "files" to be uploaded. These can be text files, so folks can write reports if they want.
Send links to good reference websites (save your bookmarks and upload them).
Descriptions are able to be done, but I am not sure that they are 'mandatory" prior to getting space (though I might be wrong).
6) "Our real problem is that as mentioned, users need to try stuff to know what they are really like."
this is one of the major advantages of the PPA, because it provides prototyping space (It's like a business incubator - its close to the main operation, but housed separately, well resourced, and plenty of people able to "look-in").
The PPA space can be used to get people to try this and try that, and give their opinions on comparative trials.
7a) "I can't help but feel this idea needs more spotlight"
It might be sensible to "keep the spotlight" on the project by using Brainstorm to vote on features or solutions on different parts of the project, as it progresses.
7b) Use Brainstorm to solicit suggestions, by saying what a problem, issue, or choice is, and inviting solutions and opinions in the Comments of the idea.
Then make a summary of the options and put each option to the vote (as a separate idea submission).
8) Also
Use the PPA to build up a team.
And don't worry if some folks get inspired and start a similar project - but aim for collaboration, or hermetic separation which ever is thought will get the best results in the long run.
|
|
|
@Tree MendUs: I honestly appreciate your comments, and there is much that you share on the topic of PPA's that is interesting, but (without pointing fingers) I still cannot help but feel that my original idea is being totally misunderstood and misrepresented. As helpful as the PPA system is, my original point was not about finding ways for more 'experimental' code to find it's way into Ubuntu.
When Google built Chrome, they did not say "How can we make Firefox better?" Instead, they started with a blank slate and said, "What should a web browser be?" My idea is similar: The community of free software developers could greatly benefit from fresh and genius answers to the more fundamental question: "What should a computer system be?" (Notice I didn't say "What should a *linux* system be?").
Linux is a kernel. That's it. Period. It provides a system for memory and resource management, a security model, a networking layer, a POSIX layer, and so on. For some reason though, when we toss around the word 'linux', it comes pre-attached with all this baggage, and tradition - a certain orthodoxy of how a computer system is assembled: kernel, X, GNOME/KDE/XFCE/etc, APT/RPM/etc, GNU command-line tools, etc. This orthodoxy has lead us to where we are now: a developer-centric, patchwork OS of disjointed systems all coaxed (with varying degrees of success) to work together and provide a somewhat coherent experience to the user. My idea is that we need to challenge this orthodoxy. We need to start with zero assumptions. We need to start with the user. What we don't need is yet another rehash of "How can we stitch together all these separately-designed (essentially pre-fabricated) systems in order to make a functioning box that people might use?" That strategy will only get you so far (I'm guessing maybe a staggering 6% of all desktops in the next 5 years - if we're lucky.) If you really want to challenge Apple, you need to do better than that.
I'm not saying we need to toss everything out. Some things should be reused. Google Chrome uses WebKit, but it's quite different from Safari. So, let's stick with the linux kernel (for now), but build a new system that is more user-centric. Just this time, let's leave our preconceptions of what 'linux' is behind.
|
|
Jadd
wrote on the 8 Sep 08 at 13:54
|
|
|
|
Not an idea.
|
|
|
|
@Jadd: At 116 votes (as of this posting), I'd have to disagree.
|
|
|
Having read again through this idea's description,
I am able to extract the following statement from the bottom paragraph.
Idea ;
===
"What Ubuntu (and linux) needs is a fresh approach to what a linux system can be, based on the principles of appeal and usability."
The preceding portion of the description is build up that states the case for making this statement.
Current Situation / Problem ;
====================
When we understand the essence of the problem then we can begin to consider some options for implementing it.
What suggestions do you have in mind for achieving the objective of the idea?
How much experimentation with the new (possibly even not yet imagined) systems will be allowed ?
|
|
sealview
wrote on the 12 Sep 08 at 11:40
|
|
|
I have to admit that I'm 100% pro for this idea, even though I have read all the comments, and I can see so far that a project like this would involve very DEEP issues and sequences. I must agree with the fact that Ubuntu should aim to the regularly end user (the one that does not know what is and how it works "apt-get").
+1
|
|
|
It seems like Mark Shuttleworth's recent announcement might be a step in the right direction:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/162
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080911-canonical-to-fund-upstream-linux- usability-improvements.html
@Tree MendUs: I appreciate the conversation we're having. You raise some interesting questions. I will have to think hard to come up with some good answers. For now, I think it is sufficient to share some articles and videos that have been of recent inspiration to me:
Aza Raskin "Don't Make Me Click" - rather long, but informative
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1360381493206287505&ei=-yHMSJzUB6GI-gGb j-C4Ag&q=aza+raskin&vt=lf
and "Away with Applications: The Death of the Desktop" (also Aza)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6856727143023456694&ei=sybMSLrcLIfA-wH B8My7Ag&q=aza+raskin&hl=en
and his concept video for a possible GUI for Firefox on mobile platforms
http://www.azarask.in/blog/post/firefox-mobile-concept-video/
The Ubiquity project at Mozilla Labs
http://www.ghacks.net/2008/08/26/mozilla-labs-ubiquity-is-a-firefox-killer-appl ication/
The Aurora concept browser by Adaptive Path
http://adaptivepath.com/aurora/
The genius work of Jonathan Harris
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_harris_tells_the_web_s_secret_stori es.html
Wei Zhou’s Blog
http://weizhou.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/scratching-the-surface/
, which also links to Aza's article on Ambient Information
http://www.azarask.in/blog/post/ambient-information-in-the-browser/
This is just scratching the surface, and to quote from Wei Zhou's article of the same name, "Human beings are task-oriented, not tool-oriented."
Unix (and Linux) comes from the deep tradition of tending first to the needs of the machine, and then subsequently to the needs of the user. This must change. (To be fair, the needs of the user in the early age of Unix were most likely quite different than the needs of most computer users today. Just being able to compile and run your program and get the necessary output was a big deal then.) Today, we need systems that are user-centric, even 'people-centric'. We need to focus on how people conceive and relate to digital information, and create interactions and design elements which give support to those innate ways of thinking and behaving. That's what the fields of design, user experience design, and usability design are charged with examining.
On the surface, it may look like I'm just talking about a new GUI, but I'd have to disagree. It's more than that. Every interaction a user has with the system, from the initial download and installation, configuring and modifying the system, dealing with glitches, hardware compatability issues, upgrades, bug reporting, feature requests, hardware upgrades, ... and more must all be addressed. A user needs an elegant and straightforward way of conceptualizing and navigating each of these types of tasks in as natural, inobtrusive and intuitive manner as possible.
OK. That's all for now.
@sealview: I get the sense from your comment that you appreciate the gravity of the situation, and I thank you for that.
|
|
|
|
@Tree MendUs: I almost forgot to thank you for that ars article. I'll have to read that.
|
|
sealview
wrote on the 18 Sep 08 at 13:12
|
|
|
Those materials put me to a very long thinking.
Great research!
For sure, they have switch my vision of internet user and the way a user interface should be built.
|
|
sealview
wrote on the 18 Sep 08 at 13:14
|
|
|
Sorry I forgot to thank you for this idea and research!
So here I go:
Thank you Ubun2ideas!
|
|
|
|
@sealview: Thanks. You made my day. :-)
|
|
|
Here's some more brainfood to chew on.
I'm thinking, what's needed is a website to allow people to collaborate on, share, get feedback and improve their ideas for user interfaces and user experiences. Sort of like a test lab, which could be supervised by the Design and Interaction Dream Team that Mark Shuttleworth is putting together at Canonical (see my previous post 13 Sep 08 at 21:17 above) ... Canonical, are you listening? (spoken with good cheer)
The idea is not to generate actual code - taking a note from the Gang of Four's book 'Design Patterns' : Design to the interface, not the implementation. In our case, we'll be designing to the user experience, not the underlying mechanisms that will attempt to deliver that experience. In other words, we are only interested in developing user experiences, not implementing them into a working system. This will allow us greater freedom to experiment, keeping our assumptions and restrictions to a minimum, while also preventing the loss of countless hours of coding only to end up possibly throwing it all out and starting again from scratch - which will undoubtedly happen repeatedly, if all goes well ;-)
Mockups, videos, mock screenshots, flash videos, user interaction diagrams - anything that can convey what the end user will experience by implementing your design concept - will have the centre stage, not code, not applications. We're not aiming for working models or even prototypes. Bottom line: We're looking to put as many different user experiences before as large an audience as possible to get their input and impressions on how we're trying to convey whatever it is we are trying to convey. Think of it like a Youtube for user interaction experiences. People will come to visit the site, observe, interact with the designs themselves - "test drive" them, if you will , comment, and hopefully the cream will rise to the top. (Hmmm, maybe 'Test Drive' is a good name for the project? I hereby copyleft the idea. Oh, and all ideas and designs on the site will be copylefted of course. )
Possible user experiences to examine with this site:
* The user logs in / logs out. (5 ideas ---> click here to View | Discuss| Upload )
* The user wants to find ______ . (12 ideas ---> click here to View | Discuss| Upload )
* The user needs to be made aware of ______. (7 ideas ---> click here to View | Discuss| Upload )
You get the idea.
Ideas for this website:
a) Tags: Tagging should be pervasive throughout to allow for complex cross-referencing.
b) Feedback: In any form - words, diagrams, videos, flash. Possibly implement a 'sketchpad' or 'scratchpad' or 'whiteboard' type thingy where people can share ideas that are hard to put into words.
c) An integrated wiki: Tags should relate to entries in a wiki. Anyone can add to and modify existing concepts. Wikis could be a valuable collaboration tool.
d) Integration with Brainstorm and other Ubuntu websites: We need to draw traffic to the site. Integrate it with Brainstorm. Maybe alongside my other idea of a 'Question of the week' (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/12643/)
Maybe a "How do you rate this idea? (and give us your comments if you like)"
As I've said, the idea of the project is not to produce actual working code, but simply to discuss and refine concepts for user interaction and design. That said, there would be nothing to prevent other interested parties who might want to start folding in some of these concepts into the Ubuntu project itself, either 'officially' or through the PPA system. I will stress again: this is not the primary objective of this project, merely a possible and likely side-effect.
|
|
|
One thing I left out: screencasts.
Just like what I mentioned above:
Aza Raskin's concept video for a possible GUI for Firefox on mobile platforms
http://www.azarask.in/blog/post/firefox-mobile-concept-video/
The Aurora concept browser by Adaptive Path
http://adaptivepath.com/aurora/
Both of these links show videos of software that does not as yet exist. This is useful, because it allows expressing new ideas, new approaches, new designs, without thought for how this might actually be implemented in code and / or with existing systems. This fosters 'out of the box' thinking, and hopefully innovative, elegant designs.
The website I am suggesting be built would be a place for people to watch, *(possibly modify?), and upload screencasts - or diagrams, mockups, mock screenshots, (even scanned images drawn on cocktail napkins for all I care) that convey concepts for solving or addressing user tasks.
*I say "possibly modify", because I just had the thought - what about interactive video streams? Why not? Kind of like interactive TV, or 'Choose your own Adventure' books - (ahhh, the 80's!) The designer could show part of a clip which shows something, say a login sequence, and then stop at a point to ask the viewer if a), b) or c) should happen next, for example. Hmmm.
Anyhow, all this is to convey my idea. Wouldn't it be great to have this interactive online open source gallery for collaborating and rating user interaction experiences?
|
|
|
Maybe Google Sketchup
http://sketchup.google.com/
and /or some online Use Cases and UML diagramming tools, would be useful as well?
Hmmm. sketchup. Sketch-up or S-ketchup?
|
|
|
Ubun2ideas,
1) There are some great suggestions above.
These can be used for all sorts of projects.
So what ever system gets used for this UI project as the spin-off opportunity of providing the technology for all other projects.
(not many other projects - if any - at present because there is no such "well developed" platform/forum feature for discussing and playing around with concepts.)
2) re 13 sept 08
"This is just scratching the surface, and to quote from Wei Zhou's article of the same name, "Human beings are task-oriented, not tool-oriented."
Unix (and Linux) comes from the deep tradition of tending first to the needs of the machine, and then subsequently to the needs of the user. This must change. (To be fair, ..."
This is a very important statement, because of the following implication/opportunity.
The (G)UI is in essence, the "translator" between the user's needs for tasks, and the PC's understanding of tools (and sub-tools, and sub sub tools - the way linux is built).
Once a task is known, it can be "templated", and then the task becomes more of a tool.
The interaction is moved from "human command" and "PC do", to "PC know what to do - does" and "Human help PC learn what it doesn't know already".
So with this kind of concept, a learning programming language that makes building blocks that can be built on (e.g. prolog,lisp?), would be handy to have in the mix - not just scripts (system/cli) and macros (desktop/apps).
3) re:
"A user needs an elegant and straightforward way of conceptualizing and navigating each of these types of tasks in as natural, unobtrusive and intuitive manner as possible. "
That's a piece of "defining criteria".
And it's a good one, because it's still very arbitrary, in that it defines the objective, without in anyway limiting (by specifying) the way the solution is delivered.
4) An interesting process is taking place here.
When new things are about to happen, there is a precursor which shows up as being changes (improvements and new) in the method of design.
This is taking place, here.
5) Where could this get us?
a) Integrated voice interaction.
b) webcam facial expression as user feedback
c) web cam eye motion detection for cursors movement
d) body motion input - jestures translated to emoticons, jestures for drawing shapes and describing motion - building 3D shapes.
e) 3D displays
f) interfacing with other senses (smell, touch/texture, temperature)
g) translating thought processes and methods for efficient understanding to/from PC
You might be interested in seeing some human interaction with PC at ;
Idea #10195: New Technology Hardware support - e.g. huge touch screen.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10195/
Keep thinking, keep plucking, cogitating and ruminating.
folks - toss ideas in - trigger thoughts in others.
When the thinking is hazy or cloudy, the wonder is what will eventually precipitate.
I was thinking about the invention of the "transistor".
It was a topic of lunch hour conversation amongst some employees of one of the American Electronics companies. They went to the boss and asked if they could work on the idea a bit more. Instead of being told to concentrate only on their job at hand, they were given a room (or two) and some other resources and a reasonable length of time to see what they could come up with.
Imagine if that hadn't happened, way back then we certainly wouldn't have PCs.
So we never know what the outcome of stepping back and looking at the bigger picture (including challenging the assumptions, and getting to the essence of the objective) will get us.
|
|
Koselara
wrote on the 29 Sep 08 at 02:47
|
|
|
I think I'm grasping your idea, even though (or perhaps because) I'm a user with only a small amount of programming experience. Basically, as one game developer said about 20 years ago, people have been creating programs by looking at the existing code & design and wondering what they can do with it, when what they should be doing is thinking up interactive/pleasurable things and then finding ways to implement it even if it means writing completely new tools unlike anything existing. (Am I reading you right?)
With that in mind, perhaps you would get better results if you included the input of people whose primary talents are in other fields, who then aren't bound by the existing rules (since they don't know them). As two examples: many things we see in computers today were thought up decades in advance by writers, while prospective teachers often take classes focused on ways of presenting information to make it as intuitive as possible. Often neither group can write code, but aiming them at lists of possible issues (as you mentioned above) and you might get useful answers different from that of current programming experts.
|
|
|
If this concept extends beyond the restriction of mouse monitor keyboard, then the following idea might be of interest
Idea #11298: Brainstorm Category for "Real World Interfacing".
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/11298/
|
|
|
@ Tree MendUs:
1)
> There are some great suggestions above.
Thanks. :-)
Yes, I think you get the idea of this project. So, tell me, do you agree that it's worth pursuing creating this collaborative open source test lab and showcase for usability concepts? ** If so, what are your ideas on what the next step should be? ** Right now, I'm just one person with an idea that a few people have heard. (see more below on #5 with "**")
2) re 13 sept 08
>The (G)UI is in essence, the "translator" between the user's needs for tasks, and the PC's understanding of tools (and sub-tools,
and sub sub tools - the way linux is built).
I agree.
> Once a task is known, it can be "templated", and then the task becomes more of a tool.
>The interaction is moved from "human command" and "PC do", to "PC know what to do - does" and "Human help PC learn what it >doesn't know already".
> So with this kind of concept, a learning programming language that makes building blocks that can be built on (e.g. prolog,lisp?), would be handy to have in the mix - not just scripts (system/cli) and macros (desktop/apps).
I'm not sure I entirely understand what you're saying. I think it has to do with identifying and encapsulating user tasks, and that perhaps 'learning' and even AI might be a part of this.
What I'm getting from this is that the role of the PC is to essentially to learn to identify the tasks the user is wanting to accomplish. Once the tasks have been identified, the PC can then dispatch those tasks to the appropriate tools and sub-tools, and deliver the results back to the user in a way in which he/she is expecting them to be returned. That sounds pretty good. What do you think?
3)
> And it's a good one, because it's still very arbitrary, in that it defines the objective, without in anyway limiting (by specifying) the way the solution is delivered.
Thanks. I think it's important to keep the concepts very open, not to impose unnecessary limitation or restriction, and to abstract the idea itself from the implimentation of that idea. I think I have the book "Design Patterns" (among others) to thank for helping me think this way.
4)
> An interesting process is taking place here.
>When new things are about to happen, there is a precursor which shows up as being changes (improvements and new) in the method of design.
>This is taking place, here.
Sounds poetic to me.
5)
> Where could this get us?
> a) Integrated voice interaction.....
An idea of mine: using the webcam as a lightmeter to determine how bright the room is and then automatically adjust screen brightness. (I hereby copyleft this idea :-)
Speaking of copylefting, I was reading something about how Google Android cannot have some of the gestures that the iPhone does (like zooming-in by dragging two fingers away from each other) - probably due to intellectual property issues. If we start the project I'm discussing on this thread, perhaps we'd be able to ensure that as new usability techniques - like new gestures - were being created adn tested, that they would enter into the public domain before private companies - like Apple - could scoup them up and claim exclusive ownership of them. - something the Free Software Foundation and/or Creative Commons might be interested in. (continued from #1 above: ** Maybe they should be some of the next folks to hear about my project idea? **)
> You might be interested in seeing some human interaction with PC at ;
> Idea #10195: New Technology Hardware support - e.g. huge touch screen.
> http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10195/
Thanks. Looks interesting.
> Keep thinking, keep plucking, cogitating and ruminating.
> folks - toss ideas in - trigger thoughts in others.
> When the thinking is hazy or cloudy, the wonder is what will eventually precipitate.
Isn't that what brainstorming *should* really be about? :-)
> I was thinking about the invention of the "transistor"....
I think Post-It notes - and probably a host of other things - were invented in a similar fashion - either by fortunate mistake, or as a spare-time activity, or side project.
> So we never know what the outcome of stepping back and looking at the bigger picture (including challenging the assumptions,
> and getting to the essence of the objective) will get us.
Personally, I'm hoping for great things :-) The great success of Linux isn't the kernel, or GNU tools, or compiz. The great success of Linux is the open source license and model of collaborative and transparent development - made possible my the internet uniting various interested and talented folks from all over the planet. Collaborative and transparent idea sharing is still in it's infancy, really. We do live in interesting times, and as I write this now, I am excited to imagine where this could take us in 5, 7, 10, 20 years time. For the next step, I think it would be great if we coul
|
|
|
(the brainstorm form wouldn't let me post it all in one piece.)
continued:
I think it would be great if we could harness this same strength of collaboration and use it to invent, share, test-drive, improve, and perhaps someday even impliment some great and compelling new computer user experiences.
@Koselara: I think you understand my ideas very well.
>people have been creating programs by looking at the existing code & design and wondering what they can do with it, when what >they should be doing is thinking up interactive/pleasurable things and then finding ways to implement it even if it means writing >completely new tools unlike anything existing. (Am I reading you right?)
You are 100% right.
> perhaps you would get better results if you included the input of people whose primary talents are in other fields, who then aren't > bound by the existing rules (since they don't know them).
This idea of yours is a wonderful and appreciated contribution to this discussion. I entirely agree. There is something to be said about 'beginner's mind' - someone who is not trained to think in certain terms, who can just bring the perspective that is not - shall I say 'corrupted' - by previous experience.
> As two examples: many things we see in computers today were thought up decades in advance by writers, while prospective
> teachers often take classes focused on ways of presenting information to make it as intuitive as possible. Often neither group > can write code, but aiming them at lists of possible issues (as you mentioned above) and you might get useful answers different >from that of current programming experts.
I want to understand what you are saying. Please correct me if I am wrong. Do you mean to say that two groups of people who might have a unique and valuable perspective on how to design user experiences would be:
a) people who write about software - like technical writers, writers of training manuals, or computer book and magazine (and blog) writers?
and b) people who teach others to use software - like people at community centres who teach seniors (and others) computer basics, as well as computing teachers and professors at college, university and community colleges, and technical institutes?
Is this close to what you are saying?
|
|
|
re
"
1)
> There are some great suggestions above.
Thanks. :-)
Yes, I think you get the idea of this project. So, tell me, do you agree that it's worth pursuing creating this collaborative open source test lab and showcase for usability concepts? ** If so, what are your ideas on what the next step should be? ** Right now, I'm just one person with an idea that a few people have heard. (see more below on #5 with "**")
"
Yes - it this collaborative open source test lab is worth pursuing.
I would like to see a facility at launchpad to cope with these kinds of new ideas. There will be lots of spin-off projects and lessons learned.
Sourceforge is a site for open source that has some ability to allow pre-alpha projects at conceptual stage.
But I would like to see this facility made in closer association with Ubuntu - ie at launchpad.
So may be we could extend the range of services at launchpad.
I'll think some more on this - what would some of the required tools functions be?
|
|
|
re
"5)
> Where could this get us?
> a) Integrated voice interaction.....
An idea of mine: using the webcam as a lightmeter to determine how bright the room is and then automatically adjust screen brightness. (I hereby copyleft this idea :-)
Speaking of copylefting, I was reading something about how Google Android cannot have some of the gestures that the iPhone does (like zooming-in by dragging two fingers away from each other) - probably due to intellectual property issues. If we start the project I'm discussing on this thread, perhaps we'd be able to ensure that as new usability techniques - like new gestures - were being created and tested, that they would enter into the public domain before private companies - like Apple - could scoup them up and claim exclusive ownership of them. - something the Free Software Foundation and/or Creative Commons might be interested in. (continued from #1 above: ** Maybe they should be some of the next folks to hear about my project idea? **)
"
A) Webcam used as sensor for automatically setting the screen brightness.
Auzy suggested something like this at
Idea #13811: Optionally adjust brightness of screen using webcam.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/13811/
B) IP protection
Even better for a project like this, would be to actually seek IP protection (patents/copyright/designs,etc), and have it released for open source free use. That way there is no argument in any arena.
Copyright protection for code, is easy to prove (in some countries) if the code (text) has been registered with the national libraries.
|
|
|
re
"2) re 13 sept 08
>The (G)UI is in essence, the "translator" between the user's needs for tasks, and the PC's understanding of tools (and sub-tools,
and sub sub tools - the way linux is built).
I agree.
> Once a task is known, it can be "templated", and then the task becomes more of a tool.
>The interaction is moved from "human command" and "PC do", to "PC know what to do - does" and "Human help PC learn what it >doesn't know already".
> So with this kind of concept, a learning programming language that makes building blocks that can be built on (e.g. prolog,lisp?), would be handy to have in the mix - not just scripts (system/cli) and macros (desktop/apps).
I'm not sure I entirely understand what you're saying. I think it has to do with identifying and encapsulating user tasks, and that perhaps 'learning' and even AI might be a part of this.
What I'm getting from this is that the role of the PC is to essentially to learn to identify the tasks the user is wanting to accomplish. Once the tasks have been identified, the PC can then dispatch those tasks to the appropriate tools and sub-tools, and deliver the results back to the user in a way in which he/she is expecting them to be returned. That sounds pretty good. What do you think?
"
Yes, you've got the idea.
"identifying and encapsulating" = the "process" of translation.
AI is definitely a part of this.
The ability to make use of AI depends on the features available for "training", and that depends on the amount of feedback and information collection.
So it needs a UI that not only "responds" to the user (users commands), but a UI that also "notices" the activities, or at least can be told that a bunch of commands can be referred to by another simple command.
|
|
|
re
"
3) and 4) => same wavelength on both counts.
|
|
|
> Yes - it this collaborative open source test lab is worth pursuing.
Thanks for that. Maybe it's time for me to start sending off some emails and seeing what responses I get -- fishing for interest.
> But I would like to see this facility made in closer association with Ubuntu - ie at launchpad.
I'm curious, why is that?
The questions on my mind are:
a) Do you think Ubuntu / Launchpad would be interested?
b) Do you think placing this on a linux distro's property will i) dissuade people from other distros from participating and ii) in light of Koselara's comments, might lessen the exposure to people from the larger community of computer users as a whole?
I guess I'm curious why you feel that Ubuntu's involvement in this would necessarily be a good thing. In my mind they are already committed to building a certain type of linux. Maybe I'm wrong, but this project feels a bit outside they're area of focus.
> I'll think some more on this - what would some of the required tools functions be?
Please do. I'll be interested to read your ideas.
> Auzy suggested something like this...
Gosh, I honestly had no idea. (where is the emoticon for 'slight embarrassment' ha.)
What can I say, "Sorry Auzy. Well, I guess great minds think alike."
-- It *is* a good idea, huh? :-)
>Even better for a project like this, would be to actually seek IP protection (patents/copyright/designs,etc), and have it released for open source free use. That way there is no argument in any arena.
Copyright protection for code, is easy to prove (in some countries) if the code (text) has been registered with the national libraries.
I didn't know that about registering text with national libraries -- good to know. I think people at Free Software Federation and Creative Commons share an interest (and possess experience, presence and expertise) in these fields, and that makes me think they would be valuable allies in a project such as the collaborative open source test lab --> COSTL .. sounds like 'coastal'.
> Yes, you've got the idea.
Good.
> So it needs a UI that not only "responds" to the user (users commands), but a UI that also "notices" the activities, or at least can be told that a bunch of commands can be referred to by another simple command.
Interesting.
> 3) and 4) => same wavelength on both counts.
Yay.
I hate to end my post on just "Yay". So... like I said above, maybe I should start emailing some folks at launchpad - and possibly Creative Commons and Free Software Foundation, and see what kind of interest there is out there, and what leads they might have for moving this idea forward. What do you say?
Actually, maybe I should ask you this question before I proceed with emails: How do you think I should pitch the idea? I mean, I need to capture the reader's attention, explain the main idea in brief, and elaborate only a bit. I'll give it some thought myself, but I'll be interested in hearing what you have to say as well.
|
|
|
> Yes - it this collaborative open source test lab is worth pursuing.
Thanks for that. Maybe it's time for me to start sending off some emails and seeing what responses I get -- fishing for interest.
* A web site would help "attract" attention to the project 24/7. And Ubuntu/PPA can serve that function. So can sourceforge.
> But I would like to see this facility made in closer association with Ubuntu - ie at launchpad.
I'm curious, why is that?
Because the services are there, free, and working ok.
Plus there is talk about adding more services.
I have not said that the project should Not have a presence anywhere else, as in Ubuntu should have exclusive exposure to the project - No.
By all means - have multiple presences of the project.
The more linux variants that get involved, the more universal will be the uptake/involvement.
But one precursor for willingness of a Linux distro to get involved, is the facilities they have for startup projects (not just alpha/beta - but also conceptual).
Ubuntu has thie, so why not us it.
Suse has a build server service like Ubuntu, but I don't know if it has services like PPA. Interestingly the build server service at Suse can also create packages for Ubuntu!
Because Ubuntu's PPA services are being improved, and they listen to feedback, then there is a good chance the the requirements that a project as fundamental as this, could be used to drive improvements to the PPA system.
So when we are thinking "Now what do we need to make thing work (hum), to get all minds productive on this project?". The same questions can be copied across to the launchpad development team as "The following features would be beneficial to make available in PPA".
The questions on my mind are:
a) Do you think Ubuntu / Launchpad would be interested?
Well they might be - but their interest is not necessary to get started because these services are made freely available, and are not contingent on somefolks's opinions.
It's a different matter if you want your project included in Ubuntu packages - then there's several criteria.
b) Do you think placing this on a linux distro's property will -
i) dissuade people from other distros from participating and
No . Place the project in their zones Too ooo. It will help make sure that prototypes can be tested on their platforms as early as anywhere else.
Actually, placing them on Ubuntu, might even encourage other distros to do something.
ii) in light of Koselara's comments, might lessen the exposure to people from the larger community of computer users as a whole?
Well it would, if it was restricted to Ubuntu, but "restriction" is not what is proposed - it's a good place to start - which is not say say "let's bog/bind it down now.
===========
I guess I'm curious why you feel that Ubuntu's involvement in this would necessarily be a good thing. In my mind they are already committed to building a certain type of linux. Maybe I'm wrong, but this project feels a bit outside they're area of focus.
Hopefully some of the above would have helped to show some of the benefits of using Ubuntu facilities.
But in addition to that - re
"committed to building a certain type of linux. Maybe I'm wrong, but this project feels a bit outside they're area of focus."
"certain type of linux" - a "people" oriented linux i.e. multilanguage, various capabilities/needs - which influence the design of the user interface.
So almost by definition/objectives, Ubuntu is harmoniously disposed to be a suitable user and development environment to run this kind of project.
"this project feels a bit outside their area of focus" - Yes it may be outside their (current) area of focus, but it is not outside their current areas of community facilities for projects.
Who knows, Ubuntu may get interested in it in future - which would be nice.
Ubuntu is beginning to get actively involved with Gnome (GUI), so it might not be too difficult to conceive that a few years down the line, Ubuntu might be interested.
|
|
|
@Tree MendUs: An update:
I've sent an email to Jono Bacon, the Ubuntu Community Manager. He sent me a few leads and I'm following up on them.
I'll keep you posted as things continue to develop.
|
|
|
@Tree MendUs: Another update.
There was something that Jono said in his email to me that I've bee thinking a lot about these past few weeks. It was something along the lines of: ideas are good, but are just one part of the process.
That (and the fact that I've recently posted what I've considered to be some really good ideas, only to see them all-but-ignored, meanwhile, other ideas that have really not impressed me at all, have gathered the lion's share of attention and votes -- very disheartening) has lead me to feel that my time is better spent learning how to implement things myself, rather than in posting and commenting here on Brainstorm. To that point, I've started to learn some HTML, afterwhich I'll dip into some CSS and perhaps some web frameworks for dynamic content, and later still, some AJAX.
I just want to thank your for the conversations we've had here, and the encouragement.
Much luck for the future.
Also, I wish the Brainstorm project much luck, and I hope that people keep in mind that the number of votes an idea receives (ie. popularity) is not always the best indication of the quality of that idea.
To quote the late, great Douglas Adams:
"So long, and thanks for all the fish" :)
|
|
|
Sorry, but did you say Jono Bacon is the community Manager now? Last I heard he was writing articles on Oreily's. His certainly the right guy to get stuff fixed though.
His totally correct though. People are voting generic ideas, but not voting good ideas. And thats why there are many pissed off people around here often too.
Because people would rather vote "improve sound support for flash" then "develop an alternative for flash which is uses standards, so works anywhere without a player".
|
Post your comment
|
