▲ 378 points
back
137 comments
Related. Others?
Calm Technology - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29115653 - Nov 2021 (68 comments)
Calm Technology - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21799736 - Dec 2019 (155 comments)
Principles of Calm Technology - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12389344 - Aug 2016 (66 comments)
Calm Technology - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9107526 - Feb 2015 (1 comment)
Calm Tech, Then and Now - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8475764 - Oct 2014 (1 comment)
Designing Calm Technology (1995) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7976258 - July 2014 (2 comments)
We're building a neuromodulation sleep headband, and we've always had the aim of getting to the point where the user puts it on, it does it's thing (slow-wave enhancement) the person takes it off in the morning and goes about their day.
I don't even want to put IO into the device at all. Not only because it increases cost and size, but because I don't what the user having to interact. We have to find better ways to fit the device in your life, so you don't even think about it.
I'm a little worried, in your example, that there might be some configuration required that could be frustrating without a way to do it on the device.
For example, I helped someone transfer their stuff from their old iPhone to their new one a few years ago. The way you're supposed to do it is touch your old iPhone to the new one and it'll just work. Needless to say, it didn't. I think it was about an hour of rebooting the old and new ones before it finally caught. Since there weren't any logs or settings to change or any way at all to influence the process it was more frustrating than magic.
Now, it's possible your product really is as simple as turning it on and it'll just work, in the same way a lamp is "turn on and it works", but if there's any configuration at all that the device does, please expose it to the users. Human brains are incredible at finding patterns, generally better than computers, and if there's a mismatch between the human's model of how something works and the device's model, it's best to allow the human to change the device's model
Do you get many people thinking this product is snakeoil?
I was working on a similar IO problem with wearables a while ago (though by the sounds of things, far less seriously than you are), and I had the idea that maybe that band/strap could function as an on-off switch, so when you undo the band (which you do when taking it off), it turns the device off, and vice versa. Could be something you could try too
How does your headband work? I did some searching and it looks like there are 2 main technologies:
1. tES, transcranial electric stimulation, used by the Somnee sleep band.
2. acoustic stimulation (sound waves), used by the Elemind sleep band, which uses EEG sensors to determine the exact sound waves to apply.
I admit I was quite skeptical, but a brief look showed that both bands have a decent amount of clinical data backing them up, although funded by the companies (unsurprising at this point, but would be good to get some independent studies on their efficacy).
Curious if anyone has tried any of these bands and what they thought.
Woah can you tell us more about this? Seems like really cool tech
I love tech like this. You put it on and it just does its thing. My HR monitor is like that, although if the receiving device doesn't immediately pair, it can be frustrating figuring out what's gone wrong.
At this point why not go low-tech and use healing crystals?
The irony of trying to read this article and being assaulted by cookie warnings and ad popups that appear while scrolling is not lost on me.
> Access Thousands of Articles — Completely Free
> Create an account and get exclusive content and features: Save articles, download collections, and talk to tech insiders — all free! For full access and benefits, join IEEE as a paying member.
Sadly they have no control over the cookie warnings
Amber Case's book on Calm Technology and design was a great read. Perhaps as a consequence of having studied Cognitive Science, I find this one to be the best book I’ve read on feature design — and not just for software.
It's full of easily digestible insights on attention and context, with excellent examples and clear explanations. It’s almost philosophical in its apparent simplicity.
What were some of these insights?
My list of calm (+), somewhat calm (o), and non-calm (-) pieces of technology that I have owned:
+ kindle from 2010 - laptop - phone - Ipad (but it's still much calmer than my computer or my phone) + Harmonica (musical instrument) o Amplifier (I use it with my harmonica through a mic) - Linnstrument (musical instrument that requires computer or ipad connection) + Pencil and paper + Paper books o Handwritten notes on Ipad - Notes in obsidian o Nintendo Switch + Paper dictionary (for language learning) - Dictionary + Claude AI on my phone
Very interesting initiative. I think examining products on that level is very important.
What I think is also important though are tools which can embrace this and work with existing technology. The modern smartphone is simultaneously a great tool and an enormous distraction. There exist no device which offers the tools I genuinely need without all of the distractions.
Agreed, had a bunch of talks about this issue with the wife.
On one hand, we're both distractible people, and it'd probably be better if we could leave our phones behind on certain family outings and trips.
But on the other hand, there's definitely times where you really need your phone on said outings: for directions, for business info, to call people, to book things, etc. It's just hard to get the necessities without bringing along everything else.
I wasn't able to find a full list of all Calm Tech certified devices, but it looks like the union of these two URLs lists most of what they have certified:
https://www.calmtech.institute/calm-tech-certification
https://www.calmtech.institute/blog/tags/calm-tech-certified
I own that timer, or an Aliexpress knockoff there-of. It is great and helps my kids with their homework.
The daylight computer looked interesting too; but its website undermines the message it seems to give. I wanted a price and to order and could do neither, but there were long paragraphs about how revolutionary it was, with left to right and up-to-down transitions.
Looking at the full list of certified devices:
- AirThing View Plus: "This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content." Supposedly this has seven sensors, but only displays two values. How does that work? The values are displayed as numbers, too. A bar chart with green, yellow, and red sections would "calmer"
- Daylight Computer - Placeholder text again. No specs. What does it actually do? Writing only? Web browsing? Dark grey on off-white text, which looks like low-end E-Ink.
- Time Timer - looks fine, although everybody else's timers count down counterclockwise. How much does it cost? If it's $10, great If it's $100, come on.
- Unplug - if you need that, you have other problems.
This is disappointing. It's like the junk that used to be advertised in the magazines that were provided in airline seat backs. These are all non-problems or easy hits. They need something more useful, such as a more usable TV remote or home control unit or car infotainment system. Those all run from bad to worse.
I've run into "simple interface" people a few times. One was a guy who was plugging his book about how clever their design for a seat-back entertainment system was. He had a model of four typical users and how they'd use it to pick from a rather short list of alternatives. I'd already read the book. I said, why not just have a channel selector knob? Then it comes out that the thing had a payment interface for pay per view. That wasn't mentioned when they were explaining how simple it was.
A few years ago, there was someone who wanted to build a GUI for some common Linux tool to promote their design shop. I suggested tackling Git, which really needs a GUI. That was too hard.
This goes way back. In the 1930s, there was a thing for radios with One Knob. Here's a 1950s TV ad for that.[1] There was a long period during which radios and TVs had a large number of knobs to be adjusted to get decent results. That was finally overcome.
My favorite simple interface is General Railway Signal's NX system.[1] This is the first "intelligent user interface", from 1936. What makes it "intelligent" is that, when a train is entering the interlocking, the dispatcher selects the incoming track, and then all the possible exit points light up. They pick the desired exit and push its button. The system then sets up the route, setting the signals and switches. Conflicts with other routes are detected, so this is safe. If there are alternate routes, NX can route around other trains. The previous technology was that the dispatcher had to figure out which switches and signals to set themselves. There was interlocking to prevent hazardous setups, but the lever machines couldn't plan a route.
This kind of UX design is really important and usually botched.
I can't stop thinking that we're circling back to how "tech" was before when it was limited because it fits our needs better. Slower, some complexity, less possibilities at every time.
Yes I think the smartphone is an instance of "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.", when tech had higher constraints there was more thought put into determining what was essential.
When I want to put on headphones to do chores around the house I pick up my 2006-era iPod. No wireless pairing to screw with, no distracting notifications, just a library of music I've already listened to a hundred times so I can just think, which of these albums am I in the mood for, and choose. The interface is simple to navigate because there's just not much to navigate, and IMO that goes a long way to have a predictable experience that never introduces frustration.
Apple naysayers have been bitching at them for decades and decades about how simplistic their apps are and how they need to wake up and join the real world by adding features K-Z to their apps in ordered to be considered a real product.
Meanwhile Apple has had to wipe away their tears at such harsh treatment with their gigantic piles of cash.
To this day I don’t understand why we have half a dozen automakers creating sleek vehicles that take care of things automagically but in computers it’s just Apple. Where’s the Audi and Lexus of computers?
> requires an instruction booklet with a list of replacements and compatible parts
I appreciate this but it doesn't seem like it belongs in a certification about calmness per se. Even annoying tech should be clear about the extent to which parts are replaceable.
This is the danger with certifications: Making the certification too broad, causes very few things to be certified. Very few things being certified, means nobody knows why the certification matters.
In my mind, repairability, "calmness," accessibility - it's all separate.
Think of calm as the opposite of surprised. As in, wow I'm surprised this computer has a proprietary soldered on SSD I can't replace! I am no longer calm!
You know whats calm and not distracting? A notebook and pen. You can buy a LOT of decent notebooks for the price of one of the reMarkables mentioned in the article. (~30 or so?), and it will last a lot longer as well. Im starting to sound like a luddite.
They mention "reMarkable Paper Pro", but I'm not willing to pay a subscription for such a physical device that already is quite expensive.
I see reMarkable says[1] you can use it without a subscription, but I'm not confident they won't pull the rug under my feet.
[1] https://support.remarkable.com/s/article/Using-reMarkable-wi...
The only thing I’d want:
Has no Blue LEDs: Pass
Has a Blue LED: Fail
Edit: Honorable mention for text boxes that silently eat newlines.
Tablets and phones could be calm tech too if they adjusted their brightness and white-point correctly based on ambient lighting.
I don't really understand what it is about. The general idea is be less distracting, but that's pretty vague, a lot of things are not distracting, in fact most things aren't, we just don't notice and that's the point.
The criteria seem to be "attention, periphery, durability, light, sound, and materials". Very broad. It looks like it even addresses openness and repairability with "an instruction booklet with a list of replacements and compatible parts", something I really care about, but how does it relate to calm?
Maybe it will be clearer when the certification document is out.
My son just had an X-ray and there were checks and balances and careful professionals. It’s taken a hundred years plus to go from early tech to available in local hospitals.
We have barely begun to address the sharp edges of social media, mobiles and more. We will get there, a calm UI and backgrounded tech (hint AI won’t do it magically we need to intentionally give up selling ads every second) but democracy helps.
working on some product ideas now, finding that any code or set of interactions you can abstract up into an analog control loop is both calm and powerful.
if you have a system where you can dynamically dial resources up and down to find an optimal output, that's a high value system. I think understanding this balance is how aesthetic properties translate into value.
Emacs is my calm tech IDE.
Amber Case is awesome. I'm personally building a silly app that makes it annoying to use social media. It will sometimes display cookie banners, cats, and more in the middle of your screen :)
That mui board looks quite nice – how hard would it be to make something wood-like that just displays the weather when you touch it? I'm thinking something more or less A5 or moleskine-shaped that I can hang on the wall in the hallway, and you touch it (or press a button or something) and it loads and display a web page, does nothing else
> Companies designing new products were unclear on what was right, or wrong, and uncertain about how they might put calm technology ideals into practice.
Nope. That’s not at all what the problem is. The problem is that when you implement features that respect the users attention an engagement metric dips slightly. And a shot caller notices. They roll the feature back. Because at the end of the day your calm means fuck all to the pursuit of endless growth.
I mean right now just seems to be one of those business that one pays to put a logo of a nice green checkmark or a tree to make your product seem more legit and ethical
Sure it’s nice to push bunch of nice UI patterns but I imagine most of the “certified” products weren’t going to be attention hogs anyways. A positive outcome from something like this would be if governments started requiring these kind of certifications like they do for accessibility.
less distracting, less distracting, less distracting than what?, oh ! oh! I know this one
its called lowering the bar, all the way, from where a device or a technology does something that saves you time and effort, to where it costs you time and attention from the things you need to do, but thats ok.
where is a ludite with a big wrench
Coincidentally there's an app on the front page that is an open-source and free for the Unpluq product mentioned in the Calm certification: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42782295
Less misdirecting tech? Sounds great. It is too late though.
I worked with Mark Weiser at the University of Maryland Heterogeneous Systems Lab, where we researched and published a paper about pie menus at CHI'88, before he went to run Xerox PARC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Weiser
https://donhopkins.medium.com/an-empirical-comparison-of-pie...
The Computer for the 21st Century:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkHALBOqn7s
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28351064
DonHopkins on Aug 29, 2021 | parent | context | favorite | on: Computers should expose their internal workings as...
Natalie Jeremijenko: LiveWire, Dangling String; Mark Weiser: Calm Technology, Ubiquitous Computing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calm_technology
>Calm Technology
>History
>The phrase "calm technology" was first published in the article "Designing Calm Technology", written by Mark Weiser and John Seely Brown in 1995.[1] The concept had developed amongst researchers at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center in addition to the concept of ubiquitous computing.[3]
>Weiser introduced the concept of calm technology by using the example of LiveWire or "Dangling String". It is an eight-foot (2.4 m) string connected to the mounted small electric motor in the ceiling. The motor is connected to a nearby Ethernet cable. When a bit of information flows through that Ethernet cable, it causes a twitch of the motor. The more the information flows, the motor runs faster, thus creating the string to dangle or whirl depending on how much network traffic is. It has aesthetic appeal; it provides a visualization of network traffic but without being obtrusive.[4]
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20190508225438/https://www.karls...
[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20131214054651/http://ieeexplore...
PDF: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~./jasonh/courses/ubicomp-sp2007/paper...
[4] https://web.archive.org/web/20110706212255/https://uwspace.u...
PDF: https://web.archive.org/web/20170810073340/https://uwspace.u...
>According to Weiser, LiveWire is primarily an aesthetic object, a work of art, which secondarily allows the user to know network traffic, while expending minimal effort. It assists the user by augmenting an office with information about network traffic. Essentially, it moves traffic information from a computer screen to the ‘real world’, where the user can acquire information from it without looking directly at it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalie_Jeremijenko#Live_Wire_...
>Natalie Jeremijenko
>Live Wire (Dangling String), 1995
>In 1995,[9] as an artist-in-residence at Xerox PARC in Palo Alto, California under the guidance of Mark Weiser, she created an art installation made up of LED cables that lit up relative to the amount of internet traffic. The work is now seen as one of the first examples of ambient or "calm" technology.[10][11]
[9] https://web.archive.org/web/20110526023949/http://mediaartis...
[10] https://web.archive.org/web/20100701035651/http://iu.berkele...
>Weiser comments on Dangling String: "Created by artist Natalie Jeremijenko, the "Dangling String" is an 8 foot piece of plastic spaghetti that hangs from a small electric motor mounted in the ceiling. The motor is electrically connected to a nearby Ethernet cable, so that each bit of information that goes past causes a tiny twitch of the motor. A very busy network causes a madly whirling string with a characteristic noise; a quiet network causes only a small twitch every few seconds. Placed in an unused corner of a hallway, the long string is visible and audible from many offices without being obtrusive."
[11] https://web.archive.org/web/20120313074738/http://ipv6.com/a...
>Mark Weiser suggested the idea of enormous number of ubiquitous computers embedding into everything in our everyday life so that we use them anytime, anywhere without the knowledge of them. Today, ubiquitous computing is still at an early phase as it requires revolutionary software and hardware technologies.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17353666
DonHopkins on June 20, 2018 | parent | context | favorite | on: Philip K. Dick: A Visionary Among the Charlatans (...
Mark Weiser once told me that Ubik was one of his inspirations for Ubiquitous Computing.
https://web.archive.org/web/20060220211305/http://www.ubiq.c...
>Ubiquitous computing names the third wave in computing, just now beginning. First were mainframes, each shared by lots of people. Now we are in the personal computing era, person and machine staring uneasily at each other across the desktop. Next comes ubiquitous computing, or the age of calm technology, when technology recedes into the background of our lives. Alan Kay of Apple calls this "Third Paradigm" computing.
https://blog.canary.is/from-tesla-to-touchscreens-the-journe...
>One year earlier, in 1998, Mark Weiser described it a little differently, stating that, “Ubiquitous computing is roughly the opposite of virtual reality. Where virtual reality puts people inside a computer-generated world,” Weiser asserted,“ubiquitous computing forces the computer to live out here in the world with people.” This wasn’t the first time someone broached the idea of IoT. In the early 1980s, students at Carnegie Mellon’s Computer Science department created the first IoT Coke machine. Author Philip K. Dick wrote about the smart home in the 1969 sci-fi novel Ubik, and four decades before, inventor and engineer Nikola Tesla addressed the concept in Colliers Magazine. In an amazingly prescient 1926 interview, Tesla said,
>"When wireless is perfectly applied the whole earth will be converted into a huge brain…We shall be able to communicate with one another instantly, irrespective of distance…and the instruments through which we shall be able to do this will be amazingly simple compared with our present telephone. A man will be able to carry one in his vest pocket."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubik
“Five cents, please,” his front door said when he tried to open it. One thing, anyhow, hadn’t changed. The toll door had an innate stubbornness to it; probably it would hold out after everything else. After everything except it had long since reverted, perhaps in the whole city … if not the whole world.
He paid the door a nickel, hurried down the hall to the moving ramp which he had used only minutes ago.
[…]
“I don’t have any more nickels,” G. G. said. “I can’t get out.”
Glancing at Joe, then at G. G., Pat said, “Have one of mine.” She tossed G. G. a coin, which he caught, an expression of bewilderment on his face. The bewilderment then, by degrees, changed to aggrieved sullenness.
“You sure shot me down,” he said as he deposited the nickel in the door’s slot. “Both of you,” he muttered as the door closed after him. “I discovered her. This is really a cutthroat business, when —“ His voice faded out as the door clamped shut. There was, then, silence.
[…]
“I’ll go get my test equipment from the car,” Joe said, starting towards the door.
“Five cents, please,”
“Pay the door,” Hoe said to G. G. Ashwood.
[...]
“Can I borrow a couple of poscreds from you?” Joe said. “So I can eat breakfast?”
“Mr. Hammond warned me that you would try to borrow money from me. He informed me that he already provided you with sufficient funds to pay for your hotel room, plus a round of drinks, as well as —“
“Al based his estimate on the assumption that I would rent a more modest room than this."
I thought this was related to the app Calm before clicking on it.
Would have been a very interesting new direction for them to expand in.
If it doesn't make as money as addition tech it will lose.
I mean that mui Board thing is pretty cool and novel, that would definitely distract me for a while.
I wish wearable tech was dumb. I dont want to connect it to my phone, to an app, to the internet.... _nothing_
Its hard to find these kinds of devices but i have to believe there's a market. I can't be the only one.
I was trying to read the article about less-distracting tech, but I was distracted by a "create an account" popup that covered the screen while doing so
Need to try it here, dorry for OT:
Does anyone know investors in europe looking to fund something a little moonshotty? What i've been working on is fundamentally "calm" at it's core, yet more advanced tech.
Happy for any input (don't think VC is the route to go).