Wednesday 9 January 2019

A Historical Design Point - Off The Shelf Quantum Computers & Full Brain Access & Just Like Netscape in 1994

Mark these words, today marks a historical turning point. You can now buy The IBM-Q an off the shelf quantum computer while The Brains of 3 People Have Been Successfully Connected, Enabling Them to Share Thoughts over the internet. With a Radical New Neural Network Design That Overcomes AI Brain Interfaces and an operating system like Solid, made by Interupt at MIT by Sir Tim Berners Lee @ MIT & Interupt who is going to up-end the internet as we know it and who created most of the internet & the web browser we know today, a fully connected, brain interface for designers, engineers and finance innovators is just about is real. The World will never be the same again.



With similar 20 & 30 year timing windows the next leap in design, engineering and finance innovation cannot not be ignored:

     a) ARPANet from the US Military was created Feb 1966, demoed publicly Oct 1967, formally launched April 1969, & decommissioned 1990 with Telenet going live Nov 22, 1987: about 20yrs after ARPANET was 1st shown openly - US Gov patents put into public domain. Taking roughly 2yrs to create the first web browser & launched in 1990 by Tim Berners-Lee, CERN then in May 1991 took HTTP and Web interfaces into the public later with Netscape ( founded April 1994 ) launching a public web browser Oct 13th 1994. 20 years from ARPANET R&D to real world use and then 10 years for public consumption.

     b) Neural Signals founded in 1987 built the first intracortical brain–computer interface and by 1999 full images seen by cats were decoded in real time with full brain to brain interfaced communication between 3 separate people over the internet was perfected and usable in Oct 2018.


     c) With AI enabled Quantum computers being sold on the open market by IBM in Jan 2019 and AI enabled brain to brain interfaces being a reality we now have the viability for a fully integrated distributed processing system such as Interrupt and Solid at MIT plus a fully immersive, interactive and internet enabled visual interfaces such as Magic Leap ( funded with Google for more than $2.3 billion in total so far ) and Nreal to produce the next level of human & computer evolution
including that off the third self.

Our design, engineering, and innovation world is about to, once again. RADICALLY change and the next 20 years will look nothing like what ours did before the time we all had computers in our homes. Now our homes and entire designed experience will be, literally, all in our heads.

  

 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook        Tweet on Twitter
   
   
      
###  
   
   
#iGNITIATE #Design #DesignThinking #DesignInnovation #IndustrialDesign #iGNITEconvergence #iGNITEprogram #DesignLeadership #LawrenceLivermoreNationalLabs #NSF #USNavy #EcoleDesPonts  #Topiade #LouisVuitton #WorldRetailCongress #REUTPALA #WorldRetailCongress #OM #Fujitsu #Sharing #Swarovski #321-Contact #Bausch&Lomb #M.ONDE #SunStar


Tuesday 4 December 2018

When Case Studies Claim "Innovation", Design Pattern via Naval Gazing Can Take Place

Often the reality is what comes after design is not innovation because a beautiful case study has been created. Previous details about how evidence based principals of engineering and finance will not trump the specific capabilities of cohesive storytelling to increase collective acceptance and use of new products. Situations such as The Apple Lisa, which was intended to “change the nature of human interaction with computers” suggest that evidence that design-driven innovation failures can also exist. Why?



Design Innovation Perspective Or Evidence Based Practices shows how when design-driven companies capitalized on their network through knowledge sharing and collaboration ( thus the sharing of the wealth from production and not controlling all aspects of production and sales ) these firms and products outperformed design-driven companies in similar regions who competed against rather than cooperated with companies in their network.

Breakthroughs, innovation and adoption is not the only aspect to success rather creation and belief in X, Y, or Z is what seems to make the strongest difference for "success" in acceptance, but not in science and/or engineering. However even there the same case can be made by utilizing others "math" to prove your own, thus group belief is what seens to matter.





 Share on Linked-In          Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+






. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



#iGNITIATE #Design #DesignThinking #IndustrialDesign #iGNITEconvergence #iGNITEprogram #LawrenceLivermoreNationalLabs #NSF #USNavy #EcoleDesPonts  #Topiade #LouisVuitton #WorldRetailCongress #REUTPALA #WorldRetailCongress #OM #Fujitsu #Sharing #Swarovski #321-Contact #Bausch&Lomb #M.ONDE #SunStar

Tuesday 6 November 2018

Design, Novelty and Innovation Come Together when Design Confidence Exists

The Botticelli Beauty Paradox is a reality of emerging utilization for one simple reason: usability, investments necessary for real engineering dominance and desire occupy a single space in the future. In the present, they morph and sway for the dance of acceptance but it does not have to be this way.




In Data Intensive Evaluation Of Design Creativity Using Novelty Value And Surprise we see the clear indications of the occupied regions of the model for beautiful new product design and engineering to exist in the world when no expectations had been been previously constructed. When these manifestations are so unexpected as to be undetectable, dissonance occurs. In the example of the Apple Newton, more than 10yrs ahead of it's time, these devices and capabilities all within the top 1% of the novelty also received such high “raw” surprise values that because they were not adjusted for confidence, the ensuing influence on usability severely limited their adoption. Why? Usage patterns that approach the basis for continued market dominance ( and often based on Geoffrey Moore's, Crossing The Chasm timing models ) mean extended acceptance curves. Beautiful future design it can be said, is often a timing manifestation more than anything else. 



  

 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook        Tweet on Twitter
   
   
      
###  
   
####
   
#iGNITIATE #Design #DesignThinking #DesignInnovation #IndustrialDesign #iGNITEconvergence #iGNITEprogram #DesignLeadership #LawrenceLivermoreNationalLabs #NSF #USNavy #EcoleDesPonts  #Topiade #LouisVuitton #WorldRetailCongress #REUTPALA #WorldRetailCongress #OM #Fujitsu #Sharing #Swarovski #321-Contact #Bausch&Lomb #M.ONDE #SunStar

Wednesday 3 October 2018

Apparently Innovative Products Means Creative Storytelling

It might be just one of those things when it comes to beauty and the ability to convey this with a story in the light of the investment necessary for real engineering dominance but in the case of "innovation" it's creative storytelling that seems to trump it all.


In Product Creativity Assessment Of Innovations Considering The Creative Process the 4 basics of product capabilities are compared to each other: Engineering - technical advancement; Design - aesthetic appeal; Marketing & Storytelling - creativity level; and Finance - purchaseability are compared to each other. What becomes surprising is that somehow, storytelling and the ability to connect to ( but not specified ) different storytelling groups, Trumps the other more specific and measurable factors. Simply, art is what impacts ROI more than any other factor give a equalized product capability. With cases where there is a superior capability in the other 4 areas, when combined with storytelling there is even higher a jump in product desire. Art it seems trumps design again.





 Share on Linked-In          Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+






. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Tuesday 4 September 2018

Want Quick Creativity? It's Mostly Been Parametric But It Soon Might Be Par-Ai-Metric

Throughout history, it has almost always been pencil, eraser and paper that designers rely on to quickly translate raw idea and visual representations into objects that can be manifested and therefore sold. There have been countless hair dryers and waste paper baskets and the artistic capability of these objects allows for their constant sales and therefore the continual flow of capital and ROI to investors. The speed however which design can now be moved from paper through the design workflow has been radically altered after the introduction of Geometric Modeling, then Algorithmic, and then Parametric modeling. Due to the capability of Parametric or "stretchy" and later programmatic script based modeling this has allowed designers to create design quickly and adapt it to the changing whims of investors. However, this still requires an incredible set of design software and engineering capabilities. This however is radically changing.




In Creativity And Parametric Design Comparing Designers Cognitive Approaches With Assessed Levels Of Creativity we see the breakdown of 3 approaches: a) combined open design and parametric design provides better support for creativity than either the geometric or algorithmic approaches in isolation while b) simple text-based parametric design approaches produce more algorithmic activities, thus final design results are more unexpectedness which can also support creativity but leaves final outputs more likely to be rigid in their design language however c) In parametric design, the solution-driven approach (rather than the problem driven approach) is more effective for supporting creative outcomes as well as divergent thinking thus increasing the likelihood of unexpected designed results.





 Share on Linked-In          Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+






. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Friday 3 August 2018

Variety Is The Spice Of Life And What Makes Successful Products - But Only During Design

It's no surprise that variety without a functional capability is art, but when novel functional capability becomes a unique selling point within the design aesthetic of a product success is often well established. Via The Metrics Of Novelty, Variety, Quality, And Quantity Of Designs a model presented at a recent The INTERNATIONAL DESIGN CONFERENCE shows a rock solid model for the way to not only evaluate and measure design capability for novelty but the mechanisms of why and how it all can come together in successful products.




Make no bones about it, these details and models are not for the faint of heart, but like all initial research the transition between raw scientific understanding and a simple tool to utilize this functionality is the key to more specific ideation and selection of products to launch. High art, high design, and high couture production are only the 1st steps in the movement to design imagery and influences that take average products and make them best sellers





 Share on Linked-In          Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+






. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



---