Pale Blue Dot

On Curiosity

There is a passage in the beginning of Carl Sagan’s book, Pale Blue Dot, in which he describes asking that, before it left our solar system, Voyager I be turned around to face the Earth. Sagan’s hope was that the spacecraft would capture one last, fleeting image of our planet before it went off into the great celestial beyond.

He initially encountered resistance. There was fear that such a maneuver would deplete what little was left of Voyager’s power reserves. And anyway, there were those who felt such an action had little if any scientific value. Nonetheless, Sagan persisted…and won.

The result: in 1990, an image of our Earth, one tiny, pale blue pixel (less, actually, since it had to be enhanced) in the endless night sky. A pixel that, as Sagan described it, conveyed something critical about our place in the universe:

From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it’s different. Consider again that dot. That’s here. That’s home. That’s us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every “superstar,” every “supreme leader,” every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

Space exploration is more than science; it is art. Like art, it helps us understand our place, our purpose, and our possibilities.

Viva Curiosity!

//

Let me know what you think on Twitter: @mmcwatters

It’s Not Peanut Butter

In the late 90s I was working with a web producer (remember those?) who insisted on saying, “JIF.” I finally snapped. “It’s GIF, not JIF! It stands for Graphics Interchange Format. Note the word is ‘graphics,’ not ‘giraffics.’”

To which he wisely replied, “Who cares?” He’s absolutely right.

Nonetheless, watching this cute video about the history of the GIF today, it still rankles to hear seemingly intelligent people say “JIF.”

I would tell them exactly what I told that Web producer nearly 15 years ago: “If you insist on saying ‘JIF,’ I’m going to start saying ‘Gay-PEG.’”

dinosaurs

Information Architecture According to Dinosaurs

“So what, exactly, do you do?” Every information architect dreads this question. Fear not, now you can just point your inquisitors to this little gem:

 

NY Times Paywall Pricing


Click the image to enlarge

After the New York Times introduced its new digital subscription pricing policies, there was much confusion. Frankly, even the NY Times’ own explanations are a bit baffling. Therefore, I’ve created the quickie infographic above in order to (hopefully) clarify things. (You can click it to see a larger version.)

Saturday, April 25, 1981

Another useless infographic.

Inspiration By Location

Another Infographic.

Where ideas strike.

Client Venn

I saw this great set of venn diagrams today, so I thought I’d make my own:

What's Your Type?

One of these things is not like the other...

Speaking of Button Placement…

I love this image (from Alan Cooper via Jeff Atwood’s Coding Horror blog), not least because of the dog jet pilot, but mostly because it so poignantly demonstrates why button placement matters.

For more, read Atwood’s excellent entry, The Opposite of Fitt’s Law.

Apparently, I am New Alphabet from Wim Crouwel.

What Type Are You?

Pentagram has a developed an online psychoanalytic tool (the password is “character”) to help you determine which typeface best represents your personality. It’s four simple questions, and the format of the test will surprise you.

According to this, I am New Alphabet form Wim Crouwel. (Here is Mr. Crouwel from the movie Helvetica describing how he came up with New Alphabet.)

I’m not sure what this says about me, but here is the description of New Alphabet from Wikipedia (my bolding):

New Alphabet is a personal, experimental project of Crouwel. The typeface embraces the limitations of the Cathode Ray Tube technology – used by early screens and phototypesetting equipment – and thus only contains horizontal and vertical strokes. Conventional typefaces can suffer under these limitations, because the level of detail is not high enough. Crouwel wanted to adapt his design to work for the new technologies, instead of adapting the technologies to meet the design. Since his letter shapes only contain horizontals and verticals, some of the letters are unconventional, while others are difficult to recognize at all. Because of this, the typeface was received with mixed feelings by his peers.

Most of the letters are based on a grid of 5 by 9 units, with 45-degree corners. There is no differentiation between uppercase and lowercase. Many of his peers were of the opinion that the design was too experimental and that it went too far. So much so, that it got a lot of newspaper coverage, which sparked a lively debate. For Crouwel it was mostly a theoretical exercise, ‘The New Alphabet was over-the-top and never meant to be really used. It was unreadable.

Words from this blog's home page as of 1/2/2010.

Wordle

Wordle will generate those interesting word-cloud images you see around the Web from words you paste or URLs you provide. On top of that, you can modify a lot of settings to customize your image. The cloud above was generated from the words on the home page of this blog as of January 2, 2010.

Are these archetypes more accurate than we'd like to admit?

Old Debate, New Approach

Are Mac people really different than PC people? Hunch wanted to find out, so they used their impressive assessment engine to poll visitors to their site.

First, they asked people whether they self-identified as a Mac or a PC person; then, each visitor was asked the same series of preference questions. The results are interesting, and may support what many people already believe to be true. (On the other hand, they may just stoke the flames of a tired old debate.)

Here are the key findings from the study:

  • Mac People are more likely to see the existing world in a light of “sameness” and thus express a desire to be perceived as different and unique.  This is consistently reflected in their aesthetic choices such as bold colors, “retro” designs, one-of-a-kind clothing and highly stylized art.
  • PC People are more likely to see the world as “different enough already” and appreciate “being in tune with those around them.”  This is reflected in their more subtle, “mainstream modern” (neither retro nor extremely contemporary) design choices and their practical choices in clothing, footwear, and cars that favor getting the job done rather than making an overt design statement.
  • Media choices and preferences vary greatly between the two groups, with Mac People trending toward more independent films, specialized comedians and design-centric magazines, and PC People trending toward more mainstream alternatives as well as sports.
  • From a personality perspective, Mac People are more likely to describe themselves as “verbal”, “conceptual”, and “risk takers”, with PC People countering that they are “numbers oriented”, “factual” and “steady, hard workers”.

There are dozens of other interesting facts, some of which I’ve included below:

What color would your kitchen be?

PC people are 27% more likely to choose beige for the color of their kitchens, whereas Mac people are 27% more likely to choose orange.

Would we find this in your living room? PC people are 26% more likey to identify an Eames chair as “a dated relic,” whereas Mac people are 18% more likely to identify it as “a timeless classic.”

Which makes you laugh harder? PC people are 37% more likely to identify with Dilbert, and Mac people are 21% more likely to identify with Calvin.

Which would you read?

PC people are more than twice as likely to choose USA Today, whereas Mac people are 53% more like to choose the New York Times.

Now, I’m sure some PC people will get irked at the results (“I’d never choose a Dodge Charger over a Mini!”), but as a self-described Mac person, I find the results equally, er, uncomfortable. Yup, I identified with most of the Mac “characteristics,” and frankly it gives me the same deep-down chill I got from this site.

Read the full report here, or get a summary with a funny cartoon here.

The Encabulator

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you The Retro (or Turbo) Encabulator: quite simply, the greatest invention of all time. (And certainly one of the best industry inside jokes ever. Scroll down for the full text version!)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And, as a special bonus, the actual copy:

Here at Rockwell Automation’s world headquarters, research has been proceeding to develop a line of automation products that establishes new standards for quality, technological leadership and operating excellence. With customer success as our primary focus, work has been proceeding on the crudely conceived idea of an instrument that would not only provide inverse reactive current, for use in unilateral phase detractors, but would also be capable of automatically synchronizing cardinal grammeters.

Such an instrument comprised of Dodge gears and bearings, Reliance Electric motors, Allen-Bradley controls, and all monitored by Rockwell Software is: Rockwell Automation’s ‘Retro-Encabulator’. Now, basically the only new principle involved is that instead of power being generated by the relative motion of conductors and fluxes, it’s produced by the modial interaction of magneto-reluctance and capacitive diractance.

The original machine had a base-plate of pre-fabulated amulite, surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two spurving bearings were in a direct line with the panametric fan. The lineup consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzelvanes, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar wane shaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented. The main winding was of the normal lotus-o-deltoid type placed in panendermic semi-boloid slots of the stator, every seventh conductor being connected by a non-reversible tremie pipe to the differential girdlespring on the ‘up’ end of the grammeters.

Moreover, whenever fluorescence score motion is required, it may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocation dingle arm, to reduce sinusoidal depleneration. The ‘Retro-Encabulator’ has now reached a high level of development, and it’s being successfully used in the operation of milford-trenions.

It’s available soon; wherever Rockwell Automation products are sold.