I am a science fiction writer, and I, as it happened, read the Dourish–Bell paper about science fiction and ubicomp. It’s good. I learned things from it. This duo knows a hell of a lot more about science fiction than most science fiction people will ever know about ubiquitous computing. Ever since I first read Mark Weiser’s paper, back in days of yore, I wanted to write some science fiction about ubicomp. Recently, I fulfilled this ambition, after spending a lot of time, an almost absurd amount of time, like four interminable years, hanging out with ubicomp people. I taught ubicomp in a design school. I wrote a little book about ubicomp for MIT Press. I addressed a major ubicomp gig in San Diego. I’m one of the few guys in the world who knows, or even pretends to know, the differences between ubiquitous, ambient, pervasive and physical computings. Was this labor necessary to me? Did it make good sense to dabble in this arena? The answer is no. Clearly no. Yet despite that, I did complete my long-awaited ubicomp novel. It’s coming out in early 2009 and is called THE CARYATIDS. It’s about a group of women working in tech support in the mid twenty-first century. THE CARYATIDS is remarkably well informed on the subject of ubicomp. There has never been a work of fiction so exquisitely ubicomp-inspired. Yet, since ubicomp is a diffuse, rapidly moving field, this work is already out of date before its publication. There’s scarcely a word in that novel about the latest sexy buzzword in ubicomp, ‘‘urban informatics.’’ As for the interface design issues... I wasn’t much into interface design when composing CARYATIDS, because like most science fiction writers, I much prefer cool gizmos to thorny, impossible issues like ‘‘context awareness.’’ So, well, I wouldn’t say I’m ashamed of my novel, but I do wish I had 4 years to do it over. However, as Steve Jobs wisely says, ‘‘Real Artists Ship.’’ So, if I were asked to advise my fellow science fiction writers about some possible detente relationship with ubicomp, I would, much like Dourish and Bell here, gently try to get them to shy away. Or rather, I would deliberately take a cool and remote overview, rather like the one in the Dourish–Bell paper, which substitutes easy, popular science fiction TV shows for the dense, gnarly, self-involved world of written science fiction. From my profession’s perspective, the equivalent approach here would be to urge people to stay away from Tim O’Reilly, Tom Igoe’s textbooks and Nokia white papers, and spend maybe a quick couple of weeks glomming up a Google search for WIRED articles and IEEE spectrum. Really—as a science fiction writer—that is more than you need for your own specific purposes. Then I’d sum up by saying—you know?—in the long run, it’s not about speculative technologies. It’s all about *law, culture, governance and money!* You’ll get perfectly adequate results in thinking about computation of any kind, if you blow off the deep geeks and the laboratory work, and concentrate fully on the puissant interests of lawyers, activists, bureaucrats and bankers. For instance, everybody knows that Xerox PARC was cram full of deep-thinking geniuses, not just Weiser, father of ubicomp, but a couple dozen similar heavy guys. These earnest pioneers were into the graphic user interface, multiuser games, peripheral computing, portable tablets, innovation after innovation that made or broke dozens of companies, except for Xerox. Xerox, for what surely seemed sound businesslike reasons, seemed to concentrate entirely on pleasing its investors. Creating document services for lawyers, activists, bureaucrats and bankers. With B. Sterling (&) Austin, TX, USA e-mail: bruces@well.com
Read full abstract