Sebastian Deterding: What your designs say about you

Prevoditelj: Senzos Osijek Recezent: Suzana Baric

We are today talking about moral persuasion:

Danas govorimo o moralnom uvjeravanju.

What is moral and immoral in trying to change people's behaviors

Što je moralno i nemoralno

u pokušaju da se promijeni ljudsko ponašanje

by using technology and using design?

korištenjem tehnologije i dizajna?

And I don't know what you expect,

Ne znam što očekujete,

but when I was thinking about that issue,

ali kad sam razmišljao o tom problemu,

I early on realized what I'm not able to give you are answers.

rano sam shvatio

da su ono što vam ne mogu dati odgovori.

I'm not able to tell you what is moral or immoral,

Nisam u mogućnosti reći vam što je moralno, a što nemoralno

because we're living in a pluralist society.

jer živimo u pluralističkom društvu.

My values can be radically different from your values,

Moje vrijednosti mogu biti radikalno drugačije

od vaših vrijednosti.

which means that what I consider moral or immoral based on that

Što znači da ono što ja smatram moralnim ili nemoralnim prema tome

might not necessarily be what you consider moral or immoral.

ne mora nužno biti ono što vi smatrate moralnim ili nemoralnim.

Također, shvatio sam da postoji jedna stvar koju vam mogu dati.

But I also realized there is one thing that I could give you,

A to je što je ovaj tip iza mene dao svijetu –

and that is what this guy behind me gave the world --

Socrates.

Sokrat.

It is questions.

To su pitanja.

What I can do and what I would like to do with you

Što mogu i što bih htio napraviti s vama jest dati vam,

kao to početno pitanje,

is give you, like that initial question,

skupinu pitanja

a set of questions to figure out for yourselves,

kako biste sami shvatili,

layer by layer, like peeling an onion,

sloj po sloj,

poput guljenja luka,

da dođete do srži onoga u što vjerujete

getting at the core of what you believe is moral or immoral persuasion.

da je moralno ili nemoralno uvjeravanje.

And I'd like to do that with a couple of examples of technologies

To bih volio napraviti s nekoliko primjera

tehnologije u kojoj su ljudi koristili elemente igre

where people have used game elements to get people to do things.

kako bi natjerali ljude da nešto učine.

Tako je ovo prvo, vrlo jednostavno, vrlo jasno pitanje

So it's at first a very simple, very obvious question

I would like to give you:

koje vam želim dati:

What are your intentions if you are designing something?

Koje su vaše namjere ako dizajnirate nešto?

And obviously, intentions are not the only thing,

I naravno da namjere nisu jedina stvar

pa evo još jedan primjer jedne od ovih aplikacija.

so here is another example for one of these applications.

There are a couple of these kinds of Eco dashboards right now --

Postoji par tih vrsta eko-kontrolnih ploča u ovom trenu –

kontrolne ploče ugrađene su u aute

dashboards built into cars --

which try to motivate you to drive more fuel-efficiently.

i pokušavaju vas motivirati da vozite sa što manjom potrošnjom goriva.

This here is Nissan's MyLeaf,

Ovo ovdje je Nissanov MyLeaf,

where your driving behavior is compared with the driving behavior

koji uspoređuje vaše ponašanje u vožnji

s ponašanjem drugih ljudi

of other people,

so you can compete for who drives a route the most fuel-efficiently.

kako biste se mogli natjecati tko vozi

s najmanjom potrošnjom.

Ove stvari su jako učinkovite, ispada

And these things are very effective, it turns out --

da su toliko učinkovite da motiviraju ljude

so effective that they motivate people to engage in unsafe driving behaviors,

da se upuste u nesigurno ponašanje tijekom vožnje –

like not stopping at a red light,

poput nezaustavljanja na crvenom semaforskom svjetlu.

because that way you have to stop and restart the engine,

Jer na taj način moraju stati i ponovno pokrenuti motor,

a to bi potrošilo dosta goriva, zar ne?

and that would use quite some fuel, wouldn't it?

So despite this being a very well-intended application,

Tako da, iako je ovo vrlo dobronamjerna aplikacija,

obviously there was a side effect of that.

naravno da je bilo nuspojava.

Here's another example for one of these side effects.

Evo još jednog primjera tih nuspojava.

Commendable: a site that allows parents to give their kids little badges

Pohvalno:

stranica koja dopušta roditeljima da daju svojoj djeci male značke

for doing the things that parents want their kids to do,

za stvari koje roditelji žele da njihova djeca rade –

poput vezanja cipela.

like tying their shoes.

And at first that sounds very nice,

Isprva to zvuči jako zgodno,

very benign, well-intended.

vrlo benigno, dobronamjerno.

Ali ispada da ako ispitate istraživanja ljudskog stanja uma,

But it turns out, if you look into research on people's mindset,

caring about outcomes,

brigu o ishodima,

caring about public recognition,

brigu o javnom priznanju,

caring about these kinds of public tokens of recognition

brigu o ovakvom obliku javnih znakova priznanja,

nije nužno jako korisno

is not necessarily very helpful

for your long-term psychological well-being.

za vaše dugoročno psihološko blagostanje.

It's better if you care about learning something.

Bolje je ako vam je stalo do toga da naučite nešto.

It's better when you care about yourself

Bolje je kada se brinete za sebe,

than how you appear in front of other people.

umjesto kako izgledate drugim ljudima.

Tako da ta vrsta motivacijskog oruđa koje se koristi

So that kind of motivational tool that is used actually, in and of itself,

sama po sebi

ima dugotrajne nuspojave

has a long-term side effect,

in that every time we use a technology

u tome što svaki put kad koristimo tehnologiju

that uses something like public recognition or status,

koja koristi neku vrstu javnog priznanja ili statusa,

we're actually positively endorsing this

zapravo pozitivno potičemo to

as a good and normal thing to care about --

kao dobru i normalnu stvar o kojoj treba voditi brigu –

that way, possibly having a detrimental effect

i na taj način postoji mogućnost štetnog učinka

on the long-term psychological well-being of ourselves as a culture.

na dugotrajno psihološko blagostanje nas samih kao kulture.

So that's a second, very obvious question:

To je drugo, vrlo očito pitanje:

What are the effects of what you're doing --

Koji su učinci onog što radimo?

the effects you're having with the device, like less fuel,

Učinci koje imate s uređajem,

kao što je manja potrošnja goriva

as well as the effects of the actual tools you're using

te učinci stvarnih oruđa koja koristite

to get people to do things --

kako biste natjerali ljude da učine nešto –

public recognition?

javno priznanje.

Now is that all -- intention, effect?

Je li to sve – namjera, učinak?

Well, there are some technologies which obviously combine both.

Postoje neke tehnologije

koje očito spajaju oboje.

Both good long-term and short-term effects

I dobre dugotrajne i kratkotrajne učinke

and a positive intention like Fred Stutzman's "Freedom,"

i pozitivnu namjeru poput Slobode Freda Stutzmana,

where the whole point of that application is --

gdje je cijela bit aplikacije,

pa, obično smo bombardirani

well, we're usually so bombarded with constant requests by other people,

pozivima i zahtjevima drugih ljudi,

with this device,

a s ovim uređajem možete ugasiti povezivost računala s internetom

you can shut off the Internet connectivity of your PC of choice

na predodređeno vrijeme

for a pre-set amount of time,

to actually get some work done.

kako biste stigli čak napraviti i nešto posla.

And I think most of us will agree that's something well-intended,

Mislim da će se većina nas složiti

da je to nešto dobronamjerno

and also has good consequences.

i ima pozitivne posljedice.

Riječima Michela Foucaulta,

In the words of Michel Foucault,

it is a "technology of the self."

"To je tehnologija samog sebe."

It is a technology that empowers the individual

To je tehnologija koja pojedincu daje moć

to determine its own life course,

odrediti svoj životni smjer,

to shape itself.

oblikovati sam sebe.

But the problem is, as Foucault points out,

Ali problem je,

kao što Foucault ističe,

that every technology of the self

što svaka tehnologija sebe

has a technology of domination as its flip side.

ima tehnologiju dominacije kao svoju drugu stranu.

As you see in today's modern liberal democracies,

Kao što vidite u današnjim modernim liberalnim demokracijama,

društvo, država,

the society, the state, not only allows us to determine our self,

dopušta nam ne samo da se sami odredimo,

to shape our self,

it also demands it of us.

da se oblikujemo, već to od nas i zahtijeva.

Zahtijeva da se usavršimo,

It demands that we optimize ourselves,

that we control ourselves,

da se kontroliramo,

da kontinuirano upravljamo nama samima

that we self-manage continuously,

because that's the only way in which such a liberal society works.

jer je to jedini način

na koji takvo liberalno društvo funkcionira.

These technologies want us to stay in the game

Ove tehnologije žele da ostanemo u igri

that society has devised for us.

koju je društvo smislilo za nas.

They want us to fit in even better.

Žele da se još bolje uklopimo.

They want us to optimize ourselves to fit in.

Žele da se usavršimo kako bismo se uklopili.

Ne želim reći da je to nužno loša stvar.

Now, I don't say that is necessarily a bad thing;

Samo mislim da nas ovaj primjer

I just think that this example points us to a general realization,

upućuje na opću spoznaju

and that is: no matter what technology or design you look at,

da bez obzira koju tehnologiju ili dizajn pogledate,

even something we consider as well-intended

čak i nešto što smatramo i dobronamjernim i da ima dobre učinke –

and as good in its effects as Stutzman's Freedom,

poput Stutzmanove Slobode –

comes with certain values embedded in it.

dolazi s određenim vrijednostima usađenima u sebi.

And we can question these values.

Možemo ispitati te vrijednosti.

Možemo pitati: Je li dobro

We can question: Is it a good thing

što svi mi kontinuirano usavršavamo sami sebe

that all of us continuously self-optimize ourselves

to fit better into that society?

kako bismo se bolje uklopili u to društvo?

Or to give you another example:

Ili da vam dam drugi primjer,

What about a piece of persuasive technology

što je s dijelom uvjeravajuće tehnologije

koja uvjerava muslimanke da nose svoje marame?

that convinces Muslim women to wear their headscarves?

Is that a good or a bad technology

Je li to dobra ili loša tehnologija

u svojim namjerama ili učincima?

in its intentions or in its effects?

Well, that basically depends on the kind of values you bring to bear

To ovisi

o vrsti vrijednosti koju možete primijeniti

to make these kinds of judgments.

kako biste donijeli ovakve procjene.

To je treće pitanje:

So that's a third question:

What values do you use to judge?

Koje vrijednosti koristite pri procjeni?

And speaking of values:

I govoreći o vrijednostima,

I've noticed that in the discussion about moral persuasion online

primijetio sam da u raspravi o moralnoj uvjerljivosti online

and when I'm talking with people,

i kad pričam s ljudima,

more often than not, there is a weird bias.

često postoji čudna subjektivnost.

I ta subjektivnost je da pitamo,

And that bias is that we're asking:

Is this or that "still" ethical?

je li ovo ili ono "još uvijek" etično?

Is it "still" permissible?

Je li "još uvijek" dopušteno?

We're asking things like:

Pitamo stvari poput:

Je li ovaj obrazac za Oxfam donaciju –

Is this Oxfam donation form,

where the regular monthly donation is the preset default,

gdje je redovna mjesečna donacija unaprijed zadana

and people, maybe without intending it,

i ljudi su, možda bez namjere,

are encouraged or nudged into giving a regular donation

na taj način ohrabreni ili potaknuti

dati redovnu donaciju umjesto jednokratne –

instead of a one-time donation,

is that "still' permissible?

je li to dopušteno?

Je li još uvijek etično?

Is it "still" ethical?

We're fishing at the low end.

Na samom smo dnu.

Ali, pitanje

But in fact, that question, "Is it 'still' ethical?"

"Je li to još etično?"

je samo jedan način gledanja na etiku.

is just one way of looking at ethics.

Because if you look at the beginning of ethics in Western culture,

Ako pogledate na početak etike

u zapadnoj kulturi,

vidite ideju vrlo drugačiju

you see a very different idea of what ethics also could be.

od onoga što bi etika još mogla biti.

For Aristotle, ethics was not about the question,

Za Aristotela etika nije bila o pitanju

"Is that still good, or is it bad?"

"Je li to još uvijek dobro ili je loše?"

Ethics was about the question of how to live life well.

Etika je bila o pitanju kako dobro živjeti život.

On je to stavio u riječ "arete"

And he put that in the word "arête,"

koju sa starogrčkog prevodimo kao "vrlina".

which we, from [Ancient Greek], translate as "virtue."

Ali zapravo znači izvrsnost.

But really, it means "excellence."

It means living up to your own full potential as a human being.

Znači živjeti ispunjavajući vlastiti potencijal

ljudskog bića.

And that is an idea that, I think,

To je ideja koju je,

mislim, Paul Richard Buchanan odlično oblikovao u nedavnom eseju

Paul Richard Buchanan put nicely in a recent essay,

where he said, "Products are vivid arguments

u kojem kaže: "Proizvodi su živahni argumenti

about how we should live our lives."

o tome kako bismo trebali živjeti svoje živote."

Naši dizajni nisu etički ili neetički

Our designs are not ethical or unethical

in that they're using ethical or unethical means of persuading us.

u tome što koriste etičke ili neetičke mjere kako bi nas uvjerili.

They have a moral component

Imaju moralni sastojak

u obliku vizije i težnje dobrom životu

just in the kind of vision and the aspiration of the good life

kojeg nam predstavljaju.

that they present to us.

And if you look into the designed environment around us

Ako pogledate u oblikovan okoliš oko nas

with that kind of lens,

s takvom lećom,

asking, "What is the vision of the good life

pitajući: "Što je vizija dobrog života

that our products, our design, present to us?",

koju naši proizvodi, naš dizajn, nama predstavljaju?",

then you often get the shivers,

onda vas često prođu trnci

because of how little we expect of each other,

zbog toga kako malo očekujemo jedni od drugih,

of how little we actually seem to expect of our life,

kako malo očekujemo

od našeg života i toga kako dobar život izgleda.

and what the good life looks like.

To je četvrto pitanje s kojim bih vas ostavio:

So that's a fourth question I'd like to leave you with:

What vision of the good life do your designs convey?

Koju viziju dobrog života

naši dizajni prenose?

And speaking of design,

I govoreći o dizajnu,

you'll notice that I already broadened the discussion,

možete primjetiti da sam već proširio raspravu

because it's not just persuasive technology that we're talking about here,

jer to nije samo uvjeravajuća tehnologija o kojoj pričamo ovdje,

to je svaki dio dizajna koji pustimo u svijet.

it's any piece of design that we put out here in the world.

I don't know whether you know

Ne znam znate li

the great communication researcher Paul Watzlawick who, back in the '60s,

velikog istraživača komunikacije Paula Watzlawicka

koji je u 60-ima ustvrdio

da ne možemo nekomunicirati.

made the argument that we cannot not communicate.

Čak i ako odlučimo biti tihi,

Even if we choose to be silent, we chose to be silent,

odlučili smo biti tihi. Komuniciramo nešto svojom odlukom da budemo tihi.

and we're communicating something by choosing to be silent.

And in the same way that we cannot not communicate,

Isto kao što ne možemo nekomunicirati,

ne možemo ne uvjeravati.

we cannot not persuade:

whatever we do or refrain from doing,

Što god da učinimo ili se suzdržavamo učiniti,

whatever we put out there as a piece of design, into the world,

što god donesemo kao dio dizajna

u svijet

ima uvjeravajući element.

has a persuasive component.

It tries to affect people.

Pokušava utjecati na ljude.

It puts a certain vision of the good life out there in front of us,

Stavlja određenu viziju dobrog života

ispred nas.

To je ono što Peter-Paul Verbeek,

which is what Peter-Paul Verbeek,

the Dutch philosopher of technology, says.

nizozemski filozof tehnologije, kaže.

Bez obzira na to namjeravamo li mi to ili ne,

No matter whether we as designers intend it or not,

we materialize morality.

kao dizajneri mi matezijaliziramo moral.

We make certain things harder and easier to do.

Određene stvari činimo težima ili lakšima za napraviti.

We organize the existence of people.

Organiziramo postojanje ljudi.

We put a certain vision

Stavljamo određenu viziju toga što je dobro ili loše

of what good or bad or normal or usual is

ili normalno ili uobičajeno pred ljude

in front of people,

by everything we put out there in the world.

svime što donesemo u svijet.

Čak i nešto bezopasno poput kompleta školskih stolica

Even something as innocuous as a set of school chairs

is a persuasive technology,

je uvjeravajuća tehnologija.

Zato što predstavlja i materijalizira

because it presents and materializes a certain vision of the good life --

određenu viziju dobrog života –

dobrog života u kojem poučavanje i učenje i slušanje ovisi

a good life in which teaching and learning and listening

is about one person teaching, the others listening;

o jednoj osobi koja poučava, drugi je slušaju,

u kojem se sjedi kad se uči,

in which it is about learning-is-done-while-sitting;

u kojem učite za sebe,

in which you learn for yourself;

in which you're not supposed to change these rules,

u kojem ne biste trebali mijenjati ova pravila

because the chairs are fixed to the ground.

jer su stolice prikovane za tlo.

And even something as innocuous as a single-design chair,

Čak i nešto bezopasno poput jednog dizajna stolice –

like this one by Arne Jacobsen,

poput ove Arne Jacobsen –

is a persuasive technology,

je uvjeravajuća tehnologija.

Zato što komunicira ideju dobrog života.

because, again, it communicates an idea of the good life:

a good life -- a life that you, as a designer, consent to by saying,

Dobar život –

život na koji kažete da pristajete kao dizajner

govoreći: "U dobrom životu,

"In a good life, goods are produced as sustainably or unsustainably

roba proizvodi održivo ili neodrživo kao ova stolica.

as this chair.

Workers are treated as well or as badly

Prema radnicima se postupa jednako dobro ili loše

as the workers were treated that built that chair."

kao s radnicima koji su stvorili tu stolicu.".

The good life is a life where design is important

Dobar život je život gdje je dizajn važan

jer je netko očito odvojio vrijeme i potrošio novac

because somebody obviously took the time and spent the money

na taj oblik dobrodizajnirane stolice,

for that kind of well-designed chair;

where tradition is important,

gdje je tradicija važna

jer je to tradicionalni klasik

because this is a traditional classic and someone cared about this;

i netko je vodio brigu o tome,

i gdje je nešto poput izražene potrošnje,

and where there is something as conspicuous consumption,

gdje je u redu i normalno

where it is OK and normal to spend a humongous amount of money

potrošiti ogromne količine novca na takvu stolicu

on such a chair,

da biste pokazali drugim ljudima koji je vaš socijalni status.

to signal to other people what your social status is.

So these are the kinds of layers, the kinds of questions

Ovo su vrste slojeva, vrste pitanja

I wanted to lead you through today;

koja sam htio da vas vode danas –

pitanje: Koje su namjere

the question of: What are the intentions that you bring to bear

koje primjenjujete kad dizajnirate nešto?

when you're designing something?

What are the effects, intended and unintended, that you're having?

Koji su učinci, namjerni ili nenamjerni, koje imate?

Koje su vrijednosti koje koristite

What are the values you're using to judge those?

pri procjeni?

Koje su vrline, težnje

What are the virtues, the aspirations

that you're actually expressing in that?

koje zapravo izražavate time?

And how does that apply,

I kako se to primjenjuje,

not just to persuasive technology,

ne samo kod uvjeravajuće tehnologije,

but to everything you design?

već kod svega što dizajnirate?

Do we stop there?

Stajemo li ovdje?

I don't think so.

Ne bih rekao.

I think that all of these things are eventually informed

Mislim da su sve ove stvari konačno informirane

by the core of all of this,

biti svega ovog –

and this is nothing but life itself.

i ovo nije ništa nego sam život.

Why, when the question of what the good life is

Zašto, kad pitanje što je dobar život

informs everything that we design,

informira sve što dizajniramo,

should we stop at design and not ask ourselves:

trebamo li stati na dizajnu i ne pitati se

How does it apply to our own life?

kako to primjeniti u vlastitom životu?

"Why should the lamp or the house be an art object,

"Zašto bi svjetiljka ili kuća trebale biti umjetnički predmet,

but not our life?"

ali ne i naš život?",

as Michel Foucault puts it.

kako to kaže Michel Foucault.

Just to give you a practical example of Buster Benson.

Samo da vam dam praktični primjer Bustera Bensona.

This is Buster setting up a pull-up machine

Ovdje Buster postavlja prečku za zgibove

at the office of his new start-up, Habit Labs,

u uredu svog novog Habit Labsa

gdje pokušavaju stvoriti druge aplikacije

where they're trying to build other applications like "Health Month"

poput Mjeseca zdravlja za ljude.

for people.

I zašto gradi nešto ovakvo?

And why is he building a thing like this?

Well, here is the set of axioms

Postoji sklop aksioma

that Habit Labs, Buster's start-up, put up for themselves

koje je Habit Labs, Busterova nova tvrtka, postavila za sebe

kako bi radili zajedno kao tim

on how they wanted to work together as a team

when they're building these applications --

pri smišljanju ovih aplikacija –

a set of moral principles they set themselves

sklop moralnih principa koje sami postavljaju

za zajednički rad –

for working together --

one of them being,

i jedan od njih je:

"We take care of our own health and manage our own burnout."

"Vodimo brigu o našem zdravlju i upravljamo vlastitim izgaranjem."

Jer na kraju, kako možemo pitati sebe

Because ultimately, how can you ask yourselves

and how can you find an answer on what vision of the good life

i kako možemo naći odgovor

na to što je vizija dobrog života

you want to convey and create with your designs

koju želimo prenijeti i stvoriti svojim dizajnima

without asking the question:

bez da se pitamo

What vision of the good life do you yourself want to live?

koja je vizija dobrog života

koji sami želimo živjeti?

I s tim završavam, hvala vam.

And with that,

I thank you.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)