In this rather long sort of marathon presentation, I've tried to break it up into three parts: the first being a whole lot of examples on how it can be a little bit more pleasurable to deal with a computer and really address the qualities of the human interface. And these will be some simple design qualities and they will also be some qualities of, if you will, the intelligence of interaction. Then the second part will really just be examples of new technologies -- new media falling very much into that mold. Again, I will go through them as fast as possible. And then the last one will be some examples I've been able to collect, which I think illustrate this at least as best I can, in the world of entertainment. People have this belief -- and I share most of it -- that we will be using the TV screens or their equivalents for electronic books of the future. But then you think, "My God! What a terrible image you get when you look at still pictures on TV." Well, it doesn't have to be terrible. And that is a slide taken from a TV set and it was pre-processed to be very sympathetic to the TV medium, and it absolutely looks beautiful.
Ovu prilično dugu prezentaciju, sam pokušao da podelim na tri dela: prvi deo ima mnogo primera o tome kako može biti malo ugodnije korišćenje računara i kako se zaista obratiti osobinama ljudskog interfejsa. Ovo će biti neke jednostavne dizajnerske osobine i to će biti neke osobine inteligencije komunikacije. Drugi deo će biti samo primeri novih tehnologija, novi mediji se često tako formiraju. Proći ću kroz njih što brže mogu. Na kraju, prezentovaću neke primere, koje sam mogao da skupim, mislim da ovo ilustruju najbolje, u svetu zabave. Ljudi veruju, i ja isto mislim, da ćemo koristiti TV ekrane ili njihove ekvivalente za elektronske knjige budućnosti. Ali kada pomislite: "Bože! Kako je grozno gledati u mirne slike na TV-u." To ne mora da bude grozno. Ovo je slajd uzet sa TV-a i on je prerađen da bude simpatičan na televiziji i izgleda zaista divno.
Well, what's happened? How did people get into this mess? Where you are now, all of a sudden, sitting in front of personal computers and video text -- teletext systems, and somewhat horrified by what you see on the screen? Well, you have to remember that TV was designed to be looked at eight times the distance of the diagonal. So you get a 13-inch, 19-inch, whatever, TV, and then you should multiply that by eight and that's the distance you should sit away from the TV set. Now we've put people 18 inches in front of a TV, and all the artifacts that none of the original designers expected to be seen, all of a sudden, are staring you in the face: the shadow mask, the scan lines, all of that. And they can be treated very easily; there are actually ways of getting rid of them, there are actually ways of just making absolutely beautiful pictures. I'm talking here a little bit about display technologies.
Šta se dogodilo? Kako su ljudi upali u ovu zbrku? Gde ste sad, iznenada sedite ispred računara i video teksta, sistema teleksta, i pomalo ste zgroženi onim što vidite na ekranu? Morate da se setite da je televizija dizajnirana da se gleda sa udaljenosti osam puta većoj od dijagonale televizora. Ako imate televizor 35cm, 49cm, bilo kakav, onda tu dijagonalu treba pomnožiti sa osam i to je udaljenost na kojoj treba da sedite ispred TV-a. Ako stavimo ljude 45cm ispred televizora, i svi artefakti, koje niko od prvobitnih dizajnera nije očekivao da vidi, iznenada, vam zure u lice: senka maske, linije razlaganja slike, sve to. Sve to se može tretirati veoma lako; u stvari postoje načini kako ih se otarasiti, postoje načini da se naprave potpuno divne slike. Govorim sada malo o displej tehnologiji.
Let me talk about how you might input information. And my favorite example is always fingers. I'm very interested in touch-sensitive displays. High-tech, high-touch. Isn't that what some of you said? It's certainly a very important medium for input, and a lot of people think that fingers are a very low-resolution sort of stylus for inputting to a display. In fact, they're not: it's really a very, very high-resolution input medium -- you have to just do it twice, you have to touch the screen and then rotate your finger slightly -- and you can move a cursor with great accuracy. And so when you see on the market these systems that have just a few light emitting diodes on the side and are very low resolution, it's nice that they exist because it still is better than nothing. But it, in some sense, misses the point: namely, that fingers are a very, very high-resolution input medium. Now, what are some of the other advantages? Well, the one advantage is that you don't have to pick them up, and people don't realize how important that is -- not having to pick up your fingers to use them. (Laughter)
Da kažem malo o tome kako možete uneti informaciju. Moj omiljeni primer su prsti. Veoma me zanimaju displeji koji su osetljivi na dodir. Visoka tehnologija, visoka osetljivost. Zar neki od vas nisu o tom pričali? To je svakako veoma važno sredstvo za unos podataka, mnogi ljudi misle da prsti imaju veoma malu rezoluciju kao pero za unos podataka preko displeja. U stvari, nisu: oni imaju veoma visoku rezoluciju kao medijum za unos treba to da uradite dva puta, da dodirnete ekran i zatim da blago rotirate prst i možete da pomerate kursor sa velikom tačnošću. Kada vidite na tržištu ove sisteme koji imaju svega nekoliko svetlosnih dioda sa strane i veoma malu rezoluciju, lepo je da postoje jer je bolje išta nego ništa. Ali, na neki način, ispušta se poenta: a to je da prsti imaju vrlo visoku rezoluciju kao sredstvo za unos podataka. Šta su neke druge prednosti? Jedna od prednosti je da ne treba da ih uzimate, ljudi ne shvataju koliko je to važno, da ne morate da uzimate svoje prste da bi ste ih koristili. (Smeh)
When you think for a second of the mouse on Macintosh -- and I will not criticize the mouse too much -- when you're typing -- what you have -- you want to now put something -- first of all, you've got to find the mouse. You have to probably stop. Maybe not come to a grinding halt, but you've got to sort of find that mouse. Then you find the mouse, and you're going to have to wiggle it a little bit to see where the cursor is on the screen. And then when you finally see where it is, then you've got to move it to get the cursor over there, and then -- "Bang" -- you've got to hit a button or do whatever. That's four separate steps versus typing and then touching and typing and just doing it all in one motion -- or one-and-a-half, depending on how you want to count. Again, what I'm trying to do is just illustrate the kinds of problems that I think face the designers of new computer systems and entertainment systems and educational systems from the perspective of the quality of that interface.
Kada na momenat pomislite na miš Mekintoša, miša neću mnogo kritikovati, kada kucate, ono što imate, hoćete da upišete nešto, prvo, treba da pronađete miša. Verovatno treba da se zaustavite. Možda ne dođe do zastoja, ali nekako morate da nađete miša. Onda ga nađete, pa morate da ga malo prodrmate da biste videli gde je kursor na ekranu. Kada konačno vidite gde je, onda verovatno morate da pomerite kursor ovamo, i onda, "beng", morate da pritisnete dugme ili već nešto. To su četiri odvojena koraka spram kucanja, pa dodirivanja i kucanja i samo obavljanja svega toga u jednom pokretu, ili jednom i po, zavisno od toga kako hoćete da računate. Ono što pokušavam da uradim je da ilustrujem vrste problema sa kojima se sreću dizajneri novih kompjuterskih sistema, sistema zabave i edukativnih sistema iz perspektive kvaliteta tog interfejsa.
And another advantage, of course, of using fingers is you have 10 of them. And we have never known how to do this technically, so this slide is a fake slide. We never succeeded in using ten fingers, but there are certain things you can do, obviously, with more than one-finger input, which is rather fascinating. What we did stumble across was something ... Again, which is typical of the computer field, is when you have a bug that you can't get rid of you turn it into a feature. And maybe ... (Laughter) maybe a mouse is a new kind of bug. But the bug in our case was in touch-sensitive displays: we wanted to be able to draw -- you know, rub your finger across the screen to input continuous points -- and there was just too much friction created between your finger and the glass -- if glass was the substrate, which it usually is.
Još jedna prednost korišćenja prstiju je što ih imate deset. Nikad nismo znali kako da uradimo ovo tehnički, tako da je ovaj prikaz zapravo lažan. Nikad nismo uspeli da koristimo deset prstiju, ali postoje određene stvari koje očigledno možete da uradite koristeći više od jednog prsta za unos podataka i to je fascinantno. Ono na šta smo naleteli je nešto ... Ponovo, to je tipično kompjuterska oblast, kad imate grešku koje ne možete da se rešite, pretvorite je u karakteristiku. I možda ... (Smeh) možda je miš nova vrsta greške. Ali, u našem slučaju greška je kod displeja osetljivih na dodir: hteli smo da možemo da prevučemo, protrljamo prst preko ekrana da bismo ubacili neprekinuti niz tačaka i tu je jednostavno bilo previše trenja koje se stvaralo između vašeg prsta i stakla, ako je staklo zamena, kao što obično i jeste.
So we found that that actually was a feature in the sense you could build a pressure-sensitive display. And when you touch it with your finger, you can actually, then, introduce all the forces on the face of that screen, and that actually has a certain amount of value. Let me see if I can load another disc and show you, quickly, an example. Now, imagine a screen, which is not only touch-sensitive now, it's pressure-sensitive. And it's pressure-sensitive to the forces both in the plane of the screen -- X, Y, and Z at least in one direction; we couldn't figure out how to come in the other direction. But let me get rid of the slide, and let's see if this comes on. OK. So there is the pressure-sensitive display in operation. The person's just, if you will, pushing on the screen to make a curve. But this is the interesting part.
Tako smo pronašli nešto što je zapravo karakteristika u smislu da možete da pravite displej koji je osetljiv na pritisak. Kada ga dotaknete svojim prstom, u stvari, tad primenjujete silu na površinu ekrana što u stvari ima određenu vrednost. Da vidim, da ubacim drugi disk i brzo vam prikažem jedan primer. Zamislite ekran, koji nije samo osetljiv na dodir, već i na pritisak. Osetljiv je na sile u ravni ekrana -- X, Y i Z bar u jednom pravcu; ne možemo zaključiti kako da odemo u drugi pravac. Ali hajde da ostavim slajd po strani, da vidimo da li će se ovo drugo pojaviti. Dakle, na delu imamo displej osetljiv na pritisak. Osoba samo gura po ekranu da bi napravila krivu. Ali ovo je zanimljiv deo.
I want to stop it for a second because the movie is very badly made. And the particular display was built about six years ago, and when we moved from one room to another room, a rather large person sat on it and it got destroyed. So all we have is this record. (Laughter) But imagine that screen having lots of objects on it and the person has touched an object -- one of N -- like he did there, and then pushed on it. Now, imagine a program where some of those objects are physically heavy and some are light: one is an anvil on a fuzzy rug and the other one is a ping-pong ball on a sheet of glass. And when you touch it, you have to really push very hard to move that anvil across the screen, and yet you touch the ping-pong ball very lightly and it just scoots across the screen. And what you can do -- oops, I didn't mean to do that -- what you can do is actually feed back to the user the feeling of the physical properties. So again, they don't have to be weight; they could be a general trying to move troops, and he's got to move an aircraft carrier versus a little boat. In fact, they funded it for that very reason.
Želim da ga zaustavim na momenat jer je film veoma loš. Ovaj dotični displej je napravljen pre otprilike šest godina, kad smo se pomerali iz jedne sobe do druge, prilično velika osoba je sela na njega i upropastila ga. Sve što imamo je ovaj snimak. (Smeh) Ali zamislite da na ekranu ima mnogo objekata i da je osoba dotakla objekat, jedan od n -- kao što je uradio ovde, a zatim ga pritisnuo. Zamislite program gde su neki objekti teški, a drugi lagani, jedan je nakovanj na paperjastom tepihu, a drugi je ping-pong loptica na staklenoj ploči. I kad ga dotaknete, zaista morate da pogurate jako da biste pomerili nakovanj preko ekrana, dok samo lagani dodir ping-pong loptice i ona prošiša preko ekrana. Šta možete da uradite -- ups, nisam mislio da to uradim -- možete da zaista obavestite korisnika o osećanju fizičkih karakteristika. Ponovo, ne mora da bude težina, može da bude pokušaj opšteg pomeranja gomile, on mora da pomeri nosač aviona spram malog broda. U stvari, zbog toga je u to investirano.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
The whole notion, then, is one that at the interface there are physical properties in that transducer -- in this case it's pressure and touches -- that allow you to present things to the user that you could never present before. So it's not simply looking at the quality or, if you will, the luxury of that interface, but it's actually looking at the idea of presenting things that previously couldn't be presented before. I want to move on to another example, which is one of a different sort, where we're trying to use computer and video disc technology now to come up with a new kind of book. Here, the idea is that you're going to take this book, if you will, and it's going to come alive. You're going to sort of breathe life into it. We are so used to doing monologues. Filmmakers, for example, are the experts in monologue making: you make a film and it has a well-formed beginning, middle and end, and in some sense the art of it is that. And you then say, "There's an opportunity for making conversational movies." Well, what does that mean? And it sort of nibbles at the core of the whole profession and all the assumptions of that medium. So, book writing is the same thing.
Cela teorija je da interfejsom fizičke osobine tog prenosnog sredstva -- u ovom slučaju su pritisak i dodiri -- koji dopuštaju da predstavite stvari korisniku koje ranije nikad niste mogli. To nije jednostavno gledanje na kvalitet ili luksuz interfejsa, već je u stvari pogled na ideju predstavljanja stvari koje ranije nisu mogle biti predstavljene. Želim da pređem na drugi primer, a to je primer druge vrste, gde pokušavamo da koristimo kompjuter i tehnologiju sa video diskovima da bismo dobili novu vrstu knjige. Ovde je ideja da ćete koristiti ovu knjigu i to će biti stvarno. Nekako ćete joj udahnuti život. Navikli smo na monologe. Ljudi koji prave filmove, oni su eksperti u pravljenju monologa: pravite film i on ima dobar početak, sredinu i kraj, na neki način to je umetnost. Tada kažete: "Postoji mogućnost za pravljenje konverzacijskih filmova." Šta to znači? Na neki način to nagriza srž cele profesije i sve pretpostavke tog medija. Takođe i pisanje knjiga je ista stvar.
What I'll show you very quickly is a new kind of book where it is mixed now with ... all sorts of things live in there, but you have to keep a few things in mind. One is that this book knows about itself. Each frame of the movie has information about itself. So it knows, or at least there is computer-readable information in the medium itself. It's just not a static movie frame. That's one thing. The other is that you have to realize that it is a random access medium, and you can, in fact, branch and expand and elaborate and shrink. And here -- again, my favorite example -- is the cookbook, the "Larousse Gastronomique." And I think I use the example all too often, but it's a great one because there is a classic ending in that little encyclopedia-style cookbook that tells you how to do something like penguin, and you get to the end of the recipe and it says, "Cook until done." Now, that would be, if you will, the top green track, which doesn't mean too much. But you might have to elaborate for me or for somebody who isn't an expert, and say, "Cook at 380 degrees for 45 minutes." And then for a real beginner, you would go down even further and elaborate more -- say, "Open the oven, preheat, wait for the light to go out, open the door, don't leave it open too long, put the penguin in and shut the door ..." (Laughter) whatever. And that's a much more elaborate one than you dribble back.
Pokazaću vam veoma brzo novu vrstu knjige koja je pomešana sa ... svim stvarima koje u njoj žive, ali morate da zapamtite par stvari. Jedna je, ova knjiga zna za sebe. Svaki kadar filma ima informaciju o sebi. On zna ili bar postoji kompjuterski čitljiva informacija o samom medijumu. To nije samo statičan kadar filma. To je jedno. Drugo je, kada to treba da ostvarite to je medijum sa nasumičnim pristupom, koji možete, u stvari, da granate, širite, elaborirate i skupljate. I ovde -- ponovo, moj omiljeni primer -- je knjiga kuvanja, Larus gastronomije. Mislim da ovaj primer koristim prečesto, ali on je odličan jer postoji klasičan završetak u tom malom enciklopedijskom kuvaru, kaže vam kako da uradite nešto kao pingvin, dođete do kraja recepta i kaže vam: "Kuvaj dok nije gotovo." To je gornja zelena traka, što u stvari ne znači mnogo. Ali vi možete da mi obrazložite ili za nekoga ko nije ekspert, da kažete: "Kuvaj 45 minuta na 200 stepeni." A za totalnog početnika, možete ići i dalje i da obrazložite -- recimo: "Uključi rernu, prethodno zagrej, sačekaj da se svetlo ugasi, otvori vrata, ne ostavljaj vrata predugo, stavi pingvina i zatvori vrata ... " (Smeh) šta god. To je mnogo više obrazloženo i tako možete da varirate.
That's one kind of use of random access. And the other is where you want to explain the same thing in different ways. If you're in a classroom situation and somebody asks a question, the last thing you do is repeat what you just said. You try and think of a different way of saying the same thing, or if you know the particular student and that student's cognitive style, then you might say it in a way that you think would have a good impedance match with that student. There are all sorts of techniques you will use -- and again, this is a different kind of branching. So, what I will show you is ... it's a rather boring book, but I'm afraid sometimes you have to do boring books because your sponsors aren't necessarily interested in fiction and entertainment. And this is a book on how to repair a transmission. Now, I don't even know what vintage the transmission is, but let me just show you very quickly some of it, and we'll move on.
To je jedan način upotrebe nasumičnog pristupa. Drugi način je kad želite da objasnite istu stvar na više različitih načina. Ako ste u učionici i neko vas nešto pita, poslednja stvar je da ponavljaš ono što si upravo rekao. Pokušavaš da smisliš drugi način da kažeš istu stvar ili ako znaš dotičnog studenta ili način na koji on shvata stvari, onda ćeš možda to reći na način za koji misliš da će imati njegovo dobro razumevanje. Koristićete razne tehnike -- i ponovo, ovo je druga vrsta grananja. Ono što ću vam pokazati je .. to je prilično dosadna knjiga, ali mislim da nekad treba da čitate dosadne knjige jer vaše sponzore ne zanima uvek fikcija i zabava. Ovo je knjiga o tome kako popraviti prenos. Čak i ne znam koliko je star prenosnik, dopustite mi da vam pokažem nešto od toga i idemo dalje.
(Video) Narrator: And continue to get descriptions for each of these chapters. Nicholas Negroponte: Now, this is his table of contents. Just a picture of the transmission, and as you rub your finger across the transmission it highlights the various parts.
(Video) Pripovedač: Nastavimo da dobijamo opise za sva ova poglavlja. NN: Ovo je sadržaj. Samo zamislite transmisiju, kako protrljate prst preko prenosnika on osvetljava razne delove.
Narrator: When I find a chapter that I want to see, I just touch the text and the system will format pages for me to read. The words or phrases that are lit up in red are glossary words, so I can get a different definition by just touching the word, and the definition appears, superimposed over the illustration.
Pripovedač: Kada pronađem poglavlje koje želim da vidim, Samo dodirnem tekst i sistem će mi formatirati strane da čitam. Reči ili fraze osvetljene crveno su u rečniku, tako da dobijam različite definicije samo dodirivanjem reči, pojavljuje se definicija, postavljena preko ilustracije.
NN: This is about the oil pan, or the oil filter and all that. This is relatively important because it sets the page ...
NN: Ovo je o planu goriva, fiteru za ulje i sve s tim u vezi. Ovo je relativno važno jer postavlja stranu ...
Narrator: This is another example of a page with glossary words highlighted in red. I can get a definition of these words just by touching them, and the definition will appear in the illustration corner. I can get back to the illustration, but in this case it's not a single frame, but it's actually a movie of someone coming into the frame and doing the repair that's described in the text. The two-headed slider is a speed control that allows me to watch the movie at various speeds, in forward or reverse. And the movie is displayed as a full frame movie. I can go back to the beginning ... and play the movie at full speed. Here's another step-by-step procedure, only in this case --
Pripovedač: Ovo je drugi primer strane rečnika crveno osvetljen. Mogu da dobijem definiciju ovih reči, tako što ih samo dodirujem i definicija se pojavljuje u uglu ilustracije. Mogu nazad na ilustraciju, ali u ovom slučaju to nije jedan kadar, to je u stvari film o nekome ko ulazi u kadar i vrši popravku objašnjenu u tekstu. Dvostrani klizač je kontroler brzine koji mi dopušta da gledam film na razne načine, napred ili nazad. I film se ceo prikazuje. Mogu nazad na početak .. i pustiti film u stvarnoj brzini. Ovde je još jedna postepena procedura, samo u ovom slučaju --
NN: Okay, this movie is ... Everybody's heard of sound-sync movies -- this is text-sync movies, so as the movie plays, the text gets highlighted. We highlight the text as we go through the movie. Repairman: ... Not too far out. Front poles, preferably. Don't loosen them too far. If you loosen them too far, you'll have a big mess. NN: I suspect that some of you might not even understand that language.
NN: OK, ovaj film je .. Svako je čuo za sinhronizovane fimove -- ovo su tekst sinhronizovani filmovi, tako da kad film ide, osvetljava se tekst. Osvetljavamo tekst kako film teče. Majstor: ... Ne predaleko. Prednji stubovi, bolje. Ne otpuštaj ih predaleko. Ako ih previše otpustiš biće veliki nered. NN: Sumnjam da neki od vas možda ne razumeju ovaj jezik.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
OK. I'm at the third and last part of this, which I said I would make an attempt to at least give you some examples that may be more directly related to the world of entertainment. And of course, good education has got to be good entertainment, so my first example will be drawn from a very recent experiment that we've been doing -- in this case, in Senegal -- where we have tried to use personal computers as a pedagogical medium. But not as teaching machines at all; the whole notion is to use this as an instrument where there is a complete reversal of roles -- the child is, if you will, the teacher and the machine is the student -- and the art of computer programming is a vehicle that sort of approximates thinking about thinking. But teaching kids programming per se is utterly irrelevant. And there are just a few slides I want to go through,
OK. Sad sam u trećem i poslednjem delu ovog izlaganja, za koje sam rekao da može biti pokušaj da vam bar pruži neke primere koji će biti malo više u vezi sa svetom zabave. Svakako, dobro obrazovanje treba da bude dobra zabava, pa je moj prvi primer iz jednog skorašnjeg eksperimenta koji sprovodimo -- u ovom slučaju, u Senegalu -- gde smo pokušali da koristimo personalne računare kao pedagoško sredstvo. Ali ne kao mašine za učenje; cela ideja je da se računar koristi kao instrument gde je potpuna zamena uloga -- dete je, ako želite, učitelj i mašina je đak -- i umetnost kompjuterskog programiranja je da prenos te vrste simulira razmišljanje o razmišljanju. Ali učenje dece da programiraju "per se" je potpuno nebitno. Ima nekoliko slajdova koje želim da prođem,
but there's a story I'd like to tell. And that was when, before we did this in any developing countries -- we're doing it, in fact, in three developing countries right now: Pakistan, Colombia and Senegal -- we did it in some pretty rough areas of New York City. And one child, whose name I've forgotten, was about seven or eight years old, absolutely considered mentally handicapped -- couldn't read, didn't even make it in the lowest section of the school's classes -- and was pretty much not in school, though physically there. But did hang around the, quote, "computer room," where there were quite a few computers, and learned this particular language called Logo -- and learned it with great ease and found it a lot of fun, it was very interesting. And one day, by chance, some visitors from the NIE came by in their double-breasted suits looking at this setup, and none of the children who were normally there, except for this one child, were there.
ali tu je priča koju želim da vam ispričam. Bilo je to kad, pre nego što smo ovo uradili u bilo kojoj zemlji u razvoju -- radimo to, u stvari, u tri zemlje u razvoju upravo sada: Pakistanu, Kolumbiji i Senegalu -- uradili smo to u nekim divljim delovima Njujorka. Jedno dete, čije sam ime zaboravio, imalo je oko sedam ili osam godina, apsolutno su ga smatrali mentalno hendikepiranim -- nije znalo da čita, nije to naučilo ni u grupi dece sa najlošijim uspehom -- i često je bilo odsutno, iako fizički prisutno. Ali se zadržalo u "kompjuterskoj prostoriji", gde je bilo svega nekoliko kompjutera, i naučilo je ovaj poseban jezik Logo -- i naučilo ga sa lakoćom, to mu je bilo vrlo zabavno, bilo je zanimljivo. Jednog dana, slučajno, došli su neki posetioci iz Nacionalnog instituta za obrazovanje, u svojim dvorednim odelima i gledali ovo, nikog od dece nije bilo tu, osim tog dečaka.
He was, and he said, "Let me show you how this works," and they got an absolutely ingenuous, wonderful description of Logo. And the child was just zipping right through it, showing them all sorts of things until they asked him how to do something which he couldn't explain and so he flipped through the manual, found the explanation and typed the command and got it to do what they asked. They were delighted, and by the time it was time to go see the principal, whom they'd actually come to see -- not the computer room -- they went upstairs and they said, "This is absolutely remarkable! That child was very articulate and showed us and even dealt with the things he couldn't do automatically with that manual. It was just absolutely fantastic."
Bio je tu i rekao je: "Dopustite mi da vam pokažem kako ovo radi", i oni su dobili potpuno genijalan, divan opis Logoa. Dete je jednostavno zujalo kroz to, pokazujući im razne stvari dok ga oni nisu pitali kako može da radi nešto što nije mogao objasniti, a on je obrnuo uputstvo, pronašao objašnjenje i otkucao komandu i dobio to što su tražili. Oni su bili oduševljeni, do vremena kad je trebalo da odu do direktora, kog su u stvari i došli da vide -- ne kompjuterski prostoriju -- otišli su gore i rekli: "Ovo je apsolutno izvanredno! To je dete je bilo veoma jasno i pokazalo nam je, čak je rešavalo stvari koje nije moglo automatski pomoću uputstva. Bilo je jednostavno potpuno izuzetno."
The principal said, "There's a dreadful mistake, because that child can't read. And you obviously have been hoodwinked or you've talked about somebody else." And they all got up and they all went downstairs and the child was still there. And they did something very intelligent: they asked the child, "Can you read?" And the child said, "No, I can't." And then they said, "But wait a minute. You just looked through that manual and you found ... " and he said, "Oh, but that's not reading." And so they said, "Well, what's reading then?" He says, "Well, reading is this junk they give me in little books to read. It's absolutely irrelevant, (Laughter) and I get nothing for it. But here, with a little bit of effort I get a lot of return."
Direktor je rekao: "To mora da je strašna greška jer to dete ne zna da čita. A vi ste očigledno bili obmanuti ili ste pričali sa nekim drugim." Svi su ustali i pošli dole, dete je još uvek bilo tu. Uradili su nešto veoma pametno: pitali su dete: "Možeš li da čitaš?" Dete je reklo: "Ne, ne mogu." Zatim su pitali: "Ali upravo si gledao uputstvo i pronašao si ... " A ono je reklo: "O, ali to nije čitanje." Oni su rekli: "Šta je onda čitanje?" Dečak je rekao: "Čitanje je ono smeće što mi daju u malim knjigama da čitam. To je potpuno nevažno, (Smeh) ništa ne dobijam za to. A ovde, uz mali napor, zauzvrat mnogo dobijam."
And it really meant something to the child. The child read beautifully, it turned out, and was really very competent. So it actually meant something. And that story has many other anecdotes that are similar, but wow. The key to the future of computers in education is right there, and it is: when does it mean something to a child? There is a myth, and it truly is a myth: we believe -- and I'm sure a lot of you believe in this room -- that it is harder to read and write than it is to learn how to speak. And it's not, but we think speech -- "My God, little children pick it up somehow, and by the age of two they're doing a mediocre job, and by three and four they're speaking reasonably well. And yet you've got to go to school to learn how to read, and you have to sit in a classroom and somebody has to teach you. Hence, it must be harder." Well, it's not harder. What the truth is is that speaking has great value to a child; the child can get a great deal by talking to you.
To je zaista nešto značilo za dete. Dete je divno čitalo, ispostavilo se da je bilo zaista sposobno. To je u stvari značilo nešto. Ta priča ima mnogo drugih anegdota koje su slične, ali vau. Ključ upotrebe kompjutera u obrazovanju je upravo tu, a to je: kada to znači nešto detetu? Postoji zabluda, to je stvarno samo zabluda: verujemo -- mislim da mnogi od vas u to veruju -- da je teže čitati i pisati nego što je naučiti govoriti. A nije, mislimo govor -- "Bože, mala deca to nekako pokupe i dok postanu dvogodišnjaci govore osrednje, ali do tri ili četiri ona govore prilično dobro. Ipak morate ići u školu da naučite da čitate, morate da sedite u učionici i neko treba da vas nauči. Dakle, to mora da bude teže." Pa, to nije teže. Ono što je istina je da govor ima veliku vrednost za dete; dete može da ima veliku korist od pričanja sa vama.
Reading and writing is utterly useless. There is no reason for a child to read and write except blind faith, and that it's going to help you. (Laughter) So what happens is you go to school and people say, "Just believe me, you're going to like it. You're going to like reading," and just read and read. On the other hand, you give a kid -- a three-year-old kid -- a computer and they type a little command and -- Poof! -- something happens. And all of a sudden ... You may not call that reading and writing, but a certain bit of typing and reading stuff on the screen has a huge payoff, and it's a lot of fun. And in fact, it's a powerful educational instrument. Well, in Senegal we found that this was the traditional classroom: 120 kids -- three per desk -- one teacher, a little bit of chalk. This student was one of our first students, and it's the girl on the left leaning with her chalkboard, and she came ... within two days -- I want to show you the program she wrote, and remember her hairstyle. And that is the program she made.
Čitanje i pisanje je potpuno beskorisno. Za dete ne postoji razlog da čita i piše, osim slepe vere, da će vam biti od pomoći. (Smeh) Šta se dešava kad odete u školu i ljudi vam kažu: "Verujte mi, svideće vam se ovo. Svideće vam se čitanje", i zatim samo čitanje i čitanje. S druge strane, dajte detetu -- trogodišnjaku -- kompjuter, oni otkucaju malu komandu i -- puf! -- nešto se desi. Iznenada ... možete da to ne zovete čitanje i pisanje, ali se sigurno neka vrsta kucanja i čitanja na ekranu mnogo isplati i još je zabavno. U stvari, to je moćan edukativni instrument. U Senegalu, pronašli smo ovo u tradicionalnoj učionici: 120 dece -- po tri u klupi -- jedan učitelj, malo krede. Ovaj đak je bio jedan od naših prvih đaka, to je devojčica koja se naslanja levo sa svojom tablom, ona je došla ... u roku od dva dana -- želim da vam pokažem program koji je napisala, zapamtite njenu frizuru. Ovo je program koji je napravila.
That's what meant something to her, is doing the hair pattern, and actually did it within two days -- an hour each day -- and found it was, to her, absolutely the most meaningful piece ... But rooted in that, little did she know how much knowledge she was acquiring about geometry and just math and logic and all the rest. And again, I could talk for three hours about this subject. I will come to my last example and then quit. And my last example -- as some of my former colleagues, whom I see in the room, can imagine what it will be. Yes, it is. It's our work -- that was a while ago, and it still is my favorite project -- of teleconferencing. And the reason it remains a favorite project is that we were asked to do a teleconferencing system where you had the following situation: you had five people at five different sites -- they were known people -- and you had to have these people in teleconference, such that each one was utterly convinced that the other four were physically present. Now, that is sufficiently zany that we would, obviously, jump to the bait, and we did. And the fact that we knew the people -- we had to take a page out of the history of Walt Disney -- we actually went so far as to build CRTs in the shapes of the people's faces. So if I wanted to call my friend Peter Sprague on the phone, my secretary would get his head out and bring it and set it on the desk,
To je nešto što je značilo njoj, pravljenje uzorka njene frizure, pravila ga je u stvari tokom dva dana -- svaki dan po sat -- i otkrila je da je to za nju, apsolutno najznačajniji deo ... Ali u korenu toga, malo je znala koliko je znanja dobijala o geometriji, samoj matematici, logici i svemu ostalom. Ponovo, mogao bih da pričam tri sata o ovoj temi. Doći ću do mog poslednjeg primera i onda završiti. Moj poslednji primer -- kao i neki od mojih bivših kolega, koje vidim u sobi, mogu da pretpostave šta će to biti. Da, to je to. To je naš rad -- koji je bio pre nekog vremena, još uvek je moj omiljeni projekat -- telekonferencije. Razlog zašto je to još uvek moj omiljeni projekat, je to što su od nas tražili da napravimo sistem za telekonferencije gde ste imali sledeću situaciju: imate pet ljudi na pet različitih mesta -- to su poznati ljudi -- i imate sve te ljude u telekonferenciji, tako da je svako potpuno ubeđen da su ostala četiri fizički prisutni. Ovo je dovoljno otkačeno da bismo, očigledno naseli i jesmo. Činjenica da smo poznavali ljude -- morali smo da pogledamo istoriju Volta Diznija -- u stvari smo otišli tako daleko smo napravili katodnu cev u oblicima ljudskih lica. Ako bih hteo da pozovem mog prijatelja Pitera Spraga na telefon, moja sekretarica bi iznela njegovu glavu i postavila je na sto,
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
and that would be the TV used for the occasion. And it's uncanny: there's no way I can explain to you the amount of eye contact you get with that physical face projected on a 3D CRT of that sort. The next thing that we had to do is to persuade them that there needed to be spatial correspondence, which is straightforward, but again, it's something that didn't fall naturally out of a telecommunications or computing style of thinking; it was a very, if you will, architectural or spatial concept. And that was to recognize that when you sit around the table, the actual location of the people becomes rather important. And when somebody gets up, in fact, to go answer a phone or use a bathroom or something, the empty seat becomes, if you will, that person. And you point frequently to the empty seat and you say, "He or she wouldn't agree," and the empty chair is that person and the spatiality is crucial. So we said, "Well, these will be on round tables and the order around the table had to be the same, so that at my site, I would be, if you will, real and then at each other's site you'd have these plastic heads. And the plastic heads, sometimes you want to project them. And there are a number of schemes, which I don't want to dwell on,
bio bi to TV koji se koristi za ovu priliku. I to je misteriozno: nema načina kako da vam objasnim količinu kontakta očima koji dobijate sa fizičkim licem projektovanom pomoću ove vrste 3D katodne cevi. Sledeća stvar koju je trebalo da uradimo je da ih ubedimo, da je neophodna prostorna korespondencija, koja je jednoznačna, ali opet, to je nešto što nije došlo prirodno iz telekomunikacija ili računarskog načina razmišljanja; to je vrlo, ako hoćete, arhitektonski ili prostorni koncept. A to je da prepoznate da kad sedite za stolom, stvarna lokacija ljudi postaje veoma važna. Kad neko ustane, u stvari, kada ode da odgovori na telefon ili koristi kupatilo ili nešto, prazno mesto postaje, ako hoćete, ta osoba. Ako često pokazujete na prazno mesto i kažete: "On ili ona se neće složiti", prazna stolica je ta osoba i prostorno je suštinsko. Zato smo rekli: "Hajde, biće okrugli stolovi i raspored oko stola će biti isti, tako da na mom mestu, biću, ako hoćete, stvaran i onda na ostalim mestima će biti ove plastične glave. Plastične glave, neki put želite da ih projektujete. I postoji veliki broj šema, o kojima ne želim da počinjem,
but this is the one that we finally used where we projected onto rear screen material that was molded in the face -- literally in the face of the person. And I'll show you one more slide, where this is actually made from something called a solid photograph and is the screen. Now, we track, on the person's head, the head motions -- so we transmit with a video the head positions -- and so this head moves in about two axes. So if I, all of a sudden, turn to the person to my left and start talking to that person, then at the person to my right's site, he'll see these two plastic heads talking to each other. And then if that person interrupts, then those two heads may turn. And it really is reconstructing, quite accurately, teleconferencing.
ali ova je ona koju smo na kraju koristili kada smo projektovali na platno ekrana pozadi koje je oblikovano na licu -- bukvalno od lica te osobe. Pokazaću vam još jedan slajd, gde je ovo zaista napravljeno iz nečega što se zove solidna fotografija i to je ekran. Pratimo, na glavi osobe, pokrete glave -- tako da videom prenosimo položaje glave -- i ta glava se pomera u otprilike dva pravca. Tako da se ja, iznenada, okrenem prema osobi ulevo i počnem da pričam sa tom osobom, tada će osoba meni desno, videti ove dve plastične glave kako pričaju jedna sa drugom. I kad ta osoba prekine, onda se ove dve glave mogu okrenuti. To je zaista rekonstrukcija, sasvim precizno, telekonferencije.