Urban5

Scott Dombkowski
Sep 5, 2018 · 2 min read

Urban5​ ​was​ ​designed​ ​by​ ​Nicholas​ ​Negroponte​ ​and​ ​MIT’s​ ​Architecture​ ​Machine​ ​Group​ ​to​ ​“study the​ ​desirability​ ​and​ ​feasibility​ ​of​ ​conversing​ ​with​ ​a​ ​machine​ ​about​ ​environmental​ ​design project…​ ​using​ ​the​ ​computer​ ​as​ ​an​ ​objective​ ​mirror​ ​of​ ​the​ ​user’s​ ​own​ ​design​ ​criteria​ ​and​ ​to​ ​form decisions;​ ​reflecting​ ​formed​ ​from​ ​a​ ​larger​ ​information​ ​base​ ​than​ ​the​ ​user’s​ ​personal​ ​experience.” (Negroponte,​ ​1970)​ ​It​ ​achieved​ ​this​ ​through​ ​the​ ​use​ ​of​ ​“instructions”​ ​and​ ​“two​ ​languages…: graphic​ ​language​ ​and​ ​English​ ​language.​ ​The​ ​graphic​ ​language​ ​[used]​ ​the​ ​abstract representation​ ​of​ ​cubes​ ​(nouns).​ ​The​ ​English​ ​language​ ​was​ ​text​ ​appearing​ ​on​ ​the​ ​screen (verbs).”​ ​(​Pertigkiozoglou​,​ ​2017)​ ​Urban5​ ​provides​ ​an​ ​example​ ​of​ ​how​ ​an​ ​understanding​ ​of​ ​an interface​ ​affects​ ​the​ ​quality​ ​of​ ​exchanges​ ​for​ ​that​ ​specific​ conversational interface.

Urban5

Connection

By​ ​establishing​ ​a​ ​common​ ​“environment​ ​and​ ​mindset,”​ ​(Dubberly​ ​&​ ​Pangaro,​ ​2009)​ ​a conversational​ ​interface​ ​provides​ ​a​ ​context​ ​and​ ​language​ ​for​ ​the​ ​successful​ ​exchange​ ​of “thoughts​ ​and​ ​words.”​ ​(OED​ ​Online,​ ​2017)​ ​​​Urban5​ ​resolved​ ​this​ ​through​ ​clear​ ​“instructions.” Through​ ​these​ ​instructions,​ ​users​ ​became​ ​aware​ ​of​ ​the​ ​restrictions​ ​of​ ​the​ ​application​ ​and​ ​their purpose​ ​within​ ​the​ ​application. Well designed instruction will be imperative to ensure a user understands the capabilities of any agent I design over this year.

By​ ​establishing​ ​a​ ​“shared​ ​language,”​ ​(Dubberly​ ​&​ ​Pangaro,​ ​2009)​ ​conversational​ ​interfaces provide​ ​users​ ​the​ ​understanding​ ​for​ ​an​ ​effective​ ​exchange​ ​of​ ​“thoughts​ ​and​ ​words.”​ ​(OED Online,​ ​2017)​ ​Urban5​ ​again​ ​provides​ ​a​ ​successful​ ​example,​ ​but​ ​this​ ​time​ ​for​ ​the​ ​creation​ ​of​ ​an environment​ ​for​ ​“[the]​ ​use​ ​of​ ​shared​ ​language.”​ ​(Dubberly​ ​&​ ​Pangaro,​ ​2009)​ ​It’s​ ​main​ ​mode​ ​of manipulation​ ​was​ ​a​ ​block​ ​and​ ​because​ ​users​ ​and​ ​the​ ​interface​ ​shared​ ​an​ ​understanding​ ​of​ ​a block​ ​and​ ​its​ ​capabilities​ ​within​ ​the​ ​environment​ ​a​ ​“shared​ ​language”​ ​(Dubberly​ ​&​ ​Pangaro, 2009)​ ​was​ ​established.​ The integration of objects, terms, language that is familiar to the couple will allow the creation of a “shared language” between a human and artificial agent.

Men Are from Kepler-438b, Women Are from Kepler-442b

Updates, findings and other things from my thesis, Conversational Symbiosis Amongst Humans and AI in the Context of Plateaus in Romantic Relationships

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade