Sublime

letting its forms speak for themselves.

“if we’re setting out to change the character of technology in our lives, we’d be wise to learn from the character of places.”*

Agre was inverting it at MIT, calling for technology that invites people into developing skills through everyday politics.

solve architectural problems in a way that made an artistic statement at, he hoped, no cost to functional utility.

the world was rich in possibility.

Pallasmaa draws substantial implications from this situation, including the loss of our ability to truly imagine alternative worlds.

The rule of thumb behind the constitution of the lab team was “diverse and influential.” This idea came straight from Adam’s work with scenario planning and, in particular, the success of convening diverse participants for the Mont Fleur process in South Africa.13 The second novel aspect of the lab was the lack of a predetermined set of outcomes.

that have been dressed up and automated as technological ones, at an inhuman scale and speed. Designed and maintained by the engineers of monopolistic tech companies, and running on data that we users continuously provide by logging in each day, the technology is both constructed by us and dominates us, manipulating our perceptions and attention. T

He encouraged looking at people’s expressed preferences and behaviours—for example, drawing on where people actually chose to gather in a home, perhaps in a corner that caught the sun, or how they used public spaces—rather than an architect’s assumptions about how the city should be built.