Dear Terry,
These are useful insights, for me. I take the main point from the article
Ken cited to be the potential violation of the integrity of existing
things when a culture of hacking is cultivated.
Surgeons may well talk of hacking of a limb (sub-system) to save the
larger system (the person) and that would be ok as trade talk. So, some of
the problem announced in the article is merely a matter of etiquette.
Fellow poets refer to each other¹s work as ³stuff². This is a very useful
subversion of the pretentious notion that what poets write is poetry.
Calling my poetry ³stuff² allows me to see it in disruptive ways - I can
chop bits off, add bits from other poems etc.
The article, for me, is a caution - it is pointing out the mad ones who
are slashing and burning while the sun goes down.
No car is precious, not even a Porsche. Computer code is just code etc.
Hack away. But, as academics, we must also transmit the history which in
many important ways, requires the preservation of artefacts.
Cheers
keith
On 11/07/2016, 11:19 AM, "PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD
studies and related research in Design on behalf of Terence Love"
<[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>The first is that of hacking involving creating prototypes by using or
>repurposing parts of already existing components or systems. This was
>often done simply by roughly cutting from one to the other. For example,
>in one project in which I was involved in a motor company wanted to test
>using 4 carburettors on a small car. An easy solution was to hack them
>off a Honda motorcycle and bodge the manifolds together - a hack good
>enough for a prototype test in an R&D setting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|