5 ms·

I think this is going in the wrong direction. Tactile feedback is so crucial for keyboards and this just completely removes it. In my opinion, technologies like

by 25cf 12y ago

I think this is going in the wrong direction. Tactile feedback is so crucial for keyboards and this just completely removes it. In my opinion, technologies like the morphing touchscreen keyboard[1] are the future. [1] http://tactustechnology.com/ http://tactustechnology.com/

wklauss 12y ago
Neither. Truth is we are a generation that grew up using keyboards. The one coming after us will consider normal to use an onscreen keyboard or voice recognition. This is a problem that will solve itself.
- rayiner 12y ago
  No. Humans depend on feedback loops to coordinate their fine motor movements. Otherwise absolute positioning accuracy is bad. Even an on-screen keyboard provides such feedback. Typing in the air doesn't.
  - sejje 12y ago
    So type on the table? Seriously, wouldn't that be the same amount of feedback as a touchscreen keyboard? Flat, and you get the wrong letter when you miss?
    - mintone 12y ago
      No, a table gives no feedback whatsoever in the manner that he's referring to at least. When you hit a key on a keyboard the key sinks into the board, you have a positive 'strike'. If you miss the key slightly then it feels different and you'll know before the wrong letter appears - this is what is meant by a feedback loop.
      - sejje 12y ago
        That's off-topic. We're talking about touchscreen keyboards, as is very clear in my post, and we won't pretend their keys sink.
    - rayiner 12y ago
      With an on-screen keyboard, you get visual feedback seeing your fingers land relative to the keys, even if you don't give tactile feedback. With this, all you see is whether you got the letter right.
  - wklauss 12y ago
    I don't understand where you and I disagree. That "no" seems confusing.
    - pritambaral 12y ago
      > This is a problem that will solve itself. > Even an on-screen keyboard provides such feedback. Typing in the air doesn't. Probably there.
- zenbowman 12y ago
  Voice is a separate issue, but this has the same problem as a touchscreen. We are very sensitive to touch. It's quite possible that with the proliferation of touchscreens, children may find increasingly less tactile feedback in the world around them (due to various other reasons - less play time, sterilized playgrounds, etc) and we could end up with a generation of adults lacking the same tactile ability we have today. So I don't think the problem solves itself, it just compounds. Much like our loss of movement ability, it seems to become less relevant, until you notice that we've lost an essential part of what makes us human. Its about time computers started fitting humans and not the other way round.
  - kndyry 12y ago
    > Its about time computers started fitting humans and not the other way round. This is a really interesting argument and has got me thinking. I have to say that I agree with your sentiment. The problem is that I think we've entered into a kind of feedback loop; a compounding problem as you described it. Technology and intelligence have allowed us to rapidly accelerate our fitness while simultaneously and subtly forcing us to become increasingly dependent upon them for continued advancement. In short, tech informs the ways in which we progress and, in the interest of further progress, our new (less human?) norms inform the progression of tech. I think there are examples of this all over the place: infants expressing confusion at a screen that is not touch sensitive, memes and texting idioms seeping into spoken conversation, or people asking their device to call someone and intentionally mispronouncing the name the same way the device does so that it "understands." But I also disagree that tech can start fitting humans in the sense you describe, because I simply don't think that's possible anymore. There's a post on the front page right now discussing self-experimentation with black widow bites, a comment from which [0] strikes me as relevant to the argument I'm about to make. To quote, "[humans]...are pretty weak creatures all things considered." A lot of cutting edge tech today is focused on AR and mobility. That's because, as the quoted comment notes, humans are weak; a weakness which also extends to our senses. Touch seems so fundamentally human, yet a computerized sensor can tell us so much more than a fingertip about a surface. It sounds terrible when I write it, but there it is: information is powerful (addicting?). It's impossible for us to conceive the kinds of situations humanity will face in the future, but after a certain point the limitations of the human body will have to be addressed. Right now that means computers. So, I suppose what I'm saying is that, imho, computers actually are fitting "humans," it's just that they are fitting what we have, will and must continue to become rather than what we once were. And that's probably a good bad thing (rather than bad bad) in the long run. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7860997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7860997
- atmosx 12y ago
  What about productivity? A professional programmer, blogger, etc. needs to create huge amounts of content. Trouch-screen devices are good for content consumption but absolutely unfit compared to computer for content creation. People are creating high quality keyboards[1] because there is an actual market :-) [1] http://codekeyboards.com/ http://codekeyboards.com/
skierscott 12y ago
That's where machine learning plays a role. It learns what movement corresponds to a particular letter. If that movement changes over time, it learns that too.

by 25cf 12y ago

wklauss 12y ago

Neither. Truth is we are a generation that grew up using keyboards. The one coming after us will consider normal to use an onscreen keyboard or voice recognition. This is a problem that will solve itself.

rayiner 12y ago
No. Humans depend on feedback loops to coordinate their fine motor movements. Otherwise absolute positioning accuracy is bad. Even an on-screen keyboard provides such feedback. Typing in the air doesn't.
- sejje 12y ago
  So type on the table? Seriously, wouldn't that be the same amount of feedback as a touchscreen keyboard? Flat, and you get the wrong letter when you miss?
  - mintone 12y ago
    No, a table gives no feedback whatsoever in the manner that he's referring to at least. When you hit a key on a keyboard the key sinks into the board, you have a positive 'strike'. If you miss the key slightly then it feels different and you'll know before the wrong letter appears - this is what is meant by a feedback loop.
    - sejje 12y ago
      That's off-topic. We're talking about touchscreen keyboards, as is very clear in my post, and we won't pretend their keys sink.
  - rayiner 12y ago
    With an on-screen keyboard, you get visual feedback seeing your fingers land relative to the keys, even if you don't give tactile feedback. With this, all you see is whether you got the letter right.
- wklauss 12y ago
  I don't understand where you and I disagree. That "no" seems confusing.
  - pritambaral 12y ago
    > This is a problem that will solve itself. > Even an on-screen keyboard provides such feedback. Typing in the air doesn't. Probably there.
zenbowman 12y ago
Voice is a separate issue, but this has the same problem as a touchscreen. We are very sensitive to touch. It's quite possible that with the proliferation of touchscreens, children may find increasingly less tactile feedback in the world around them (due to various other reasons - less play time, sterilized playgrounds, etc) and we could end up with a generation of adults lacking the same tactile ability we have today. So I don't think the problem solves itself, it just compounds. Much like our loss of movement ability, it seems to become less relevant, until you notice that we've lost an essential part of what makes us human. Its about time computers started fitting humans and not the other way round.
- kndyry 12y ago
  > Its about time computers started fitting humans and not the other way round. This is a really interesting argument and has got me thinking. I have to say that I agree with your sentiment. The problem is that I think we've entered into a kind of feedback loop; a compounding problem as you described it. Technology and intelligence have allowed us to rapidly accelerate our fitness while simultaneously and subtly forcing us to become increasingly dependent upon them for continued advancement. In short, tech informs the ways in which we progress and, in the interest of further progress, our new (less human?) norms inform the progression of tech. I think there are examples of this all over the place: infants expressing confusion at a screen that is not touch sensitive, memes and texting idioms seeping into spoken conversation, or people asking their device to call someone and intentionally mispronouncing the name the same way the device does so that it "understands." But I also disagree that tech can start fitting humans in the sense you describe, because I simply don't think that's possible anymore. There's a post on the front page right now discussing self-experimentation with black widow bites, a comment from which [0] strikes me as relevant to the argument I'm about to make. To quote, "[humans]...are pretty weak creatures all things considered." A lot of cutting edge tech today is focused on AR and mobility. That's because, as the quoted comment notes, humans are weak; a weakness which also extends to our senses. Touch seems so fundamentally human, yet a computerized sensor can tell us so much more than a fingertip about a surface. It sounds terrible when I write it, but there it is: information is powerful (addicting?). It's impossible for us to conceive the kinds of situations humanity will face in the future, but after a certain point the limitations of the human body will have to be addressed. Right now that means computers. So, I suppose what I'm saying is that, imho, computers actually are fitting "humans," it's just that they are fitting what we have, will and must continue to become rather than what we once were. And that's probably a good bad thing (rather than bad bad) in the long run. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7860997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7860997
atmosx 12y ago
What about productivity? A professional programmer, blogger, etc. needs to create huge amounts of content. Trouch-screen devices are good for content consumption but absolutely unfit compared to computer for content creation. People are creating high quality keyboards[1] because there is an actual market :-) [1] http://codekeyboards.com/ http://codekeyboards.com/

skierscott 12y ago

That's where machine learning plays a role. It learns what movement corresponds to a particular letter. If that movement changes over time, it learns that too.