1. Casablanca: Designing Social Communication Devices for the Home Debby Hindus, Scott D. Mainwaring, Nicole Leduc, Anna Elisabeth Hagstrom and Oliver Bayley Interval Research Corporation

2. Project Goal Incorporate media space concepts into domestic environments

3. Influences Previous work in computer-mediated communication (e.g. awareness, audio- related media spaces) Home technologies (e.g. HomeNet)

4. Early Prototypes CommuteBoard NeighborNet KitchenNet Poor video performance over ISDN

5. CommuteBoard Handwriting and audio sensing Helping carpool participants arrange their rides more effectively Feedback: pros: useful, fun, casual interface. Cons: audio not informative, handwriting hard to read, space limited

6. CommuteBoard Conclusions on home-based technology Use simple, expressive means to communicate Aesthetics are important Video and audio: need high-speed to be effective

7. Themes Household as displays Household as sanctuary Family life is household priority Women are household communicators Telephone not adequate Design implications: focus on aesthetics, family life and adult women

8. Concepts Awareness-related  In Touch- “thinking of you” tokens  Presence Light – linked objects showing activity Audio Space-related  RoomLink connects rooms in 2 households via high quality audio Note and Picture Sharing  MessageBoard- a way for collocated individuals to share notes, photos etc on the same space

9. Feedback RoomLink widely regarded as useful Appreciated sound quality MessageBoard- valued for group coordination, artifact sharing abilities In Touch – fun but not very practical Presence Light- perceived as a privacy threat

10. Prototypes Intentional Presence Light- share a user’s presence only when activated by user  Curtain /lampshade devices  Users choose icons to represent them ScanBoard- similar to messageboard using existing technology  Post messages  Scan pictures  move/hide notes  Automatically updated through shared database

11. Prototypes-Results IPL valued for Intentionality and aesthetics ScanBoard valued for scanning and sharing Both valued for Expressiveness and simplicity

12. Conclusions Domestic domains are distinct from workplace environments, with different goals and priorities Media space in homes will span a wide range Social communication is a valuable research area Let users express themselves, but keep it simple Don’t make users feel obligated to keep in touch

13. Questions Isn’t focus group data fundamentally flawed? Most of these applications only work if other people you know had them also. How will that affect popularity? (curse of the videophone) Are these applications appealing to men also? What happens when things malfunction?

14. At Home with Ubiquitous Computing: Seven Challenges W. Keith Edwards and Rebecca E. Grinter Computer science laboratory, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center

15. Smart Homes Definition: Domestic environments in which we are surrounded by interconnected technologies that are responsive to our presence and actions.

16. Aware Home Research Initiative (AHRI) Interdisciplinary work at Georgia Tech Uses both location-aware and context aware technologies Challenges in both developing the technology and addressing privacy concerns

17. AwareHome Design for people: improve communication, create memory aids, home assistants- especially good for elderly and homebound Examples: Dude’s Magic Box Gesture Pendant

18. Seven Challenges The Accidentally Smart Home Impromptu Interoperability No Systems Administrator Designing for Domestic Use Social Implications of Aware Home Technologies Reliability Inference in the Presence of Ambiguity

19. The Accidentally Smart Home Existing homes do not have infrastructure in place Technology will most likely be added piecemeal Result: Unintended communication btw devices How will people understand how to fix problems as they arise? Design Challenge: Provide ways to help users understand the capabilities of the technology and how to control it

20. Impromptu Interoperability The ability to interconnect without advance planning How do we solve Issues with incompatible device/software? Challenge: every device must be programmed to understand every device it may ever encounter or need to connect with Standards may help devices connect with a class of devices but not every individual one Need new models of connectivity (e.g. CoolTown, Speakeasy)

21. No Systems Administrator Computers in home = users become system administrators Home networks add increased workload and complexity to admin tasks Challenge: don’t require “expert level” knowledge to use system How can small devices provide rich interaction without sacrificing simplicity? How do we design for remote diagnosis and support while preventing unwanted parties from using it?

22. Designing for Domestic Use Vendors and users find it hard to predict in what context people will use technology Most home devices “shared”, rules dictate use Best technology are the most flexible Smart technology will be disruptive in domestic environment Challenge: Designing Technology that can adapt to domestic routines

23. Social Implications of Aware Home Technologies Labor saving devices really labor-changing: reduce work time initially, but increases expectations Good parenting- discussion of “values” regarding technology use can lead to broader debates( e.g. V chip) Privacy issues

24. Reliability Existing domestic technology very reliable  Different development culture- wary of bugs, hard to implement patches, upgrades  Different technological approaches – bulk of functionality placed on network, not device utility approach)  Different market expectations-appliances so reliable, not seen as complex systems  Different regulations- safety, service standards in place Challenge: Achieving expected level of reliability – need adequate time and resources

25. Inference in the Presence of Ambiguity Technology that assists/predicts human behavior, not well received How smart does a smart home need to be to be useful and successful? Machine inference- greater possibility of error If inference is required, models of actions and preferences must be built Challenge: Ensure ambiguity is not hidden from users or parts of system that need to access it  Inference needs to be predictable and recoverable

26. Conclusion Homes not currently designed to be smart Need a balance between reliability and Interoperability Social impact of technology hard to predict Big question: How smart does the smart home need to be? “Smartness” makes it disruptive to users, unpredictable

27. Questions How will these technologies affect the “home as sanctuary” belief? How expensive would these systems be to set up, even if they were built in to a new house? Will there ever be enough demand to warrant standards in connectivity? How will Smart homes change communication within families? Because routines are so personal and unique, how do we design a system to adapt seamlessly?