日本語に訳してください。
The field of ubiquitous computing was inspired
by Mark Weiser’s11 vision of computing artifacts that
disappear. “They weave themselves into the fabric
of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from
it.” Although Weiser cautioned that achieving the
vision of ubiquitous computing would require a new
way of thinking about computers, that takes into
account the natural human environment, to date
no one has articulated this new way of thinking.3
Here, we address this gap, making the argument that
ubiquitous computing artifacts need to be physically
and cognitively available. We show what this means
in practice, translating our conceptual findings
into principles for design. Examples and a specific
application scenario show how ubiquitous computing
that depends on these principles is both physically and
cognitively available, seamlessly supporting living.
The term ‘ubiquitous computing’ has been used
broadly to include pervasive or context-aware
computing, anytime-anywhere computing (access to
the same information everywhere) and even mobile
computing. Work on this ‘ubiquitous computing’ has
been largely application driven, reporting on
technical developments and new applications
for RF(Radio Frequency)
ID technologies, smart phones, active
sensors, and wearable computing. The
risk is that in focusing on the technical
capabilities, the end result is a host
of advanced applications that bear
little resemblance to Weiser’s original
vision. This is a classic case of not seeing
the forest for the trees.
In this article, we want to take a walk
in the forest, that is, to suggest a new
way of thinking about how computing
artifacts can assist us in living. In doing
this, we draw on German philosopher
Martin Heidegger’s analysis of the
need for equipment to be ‘available.’1
While several influential studies in human-
computer interaction (HCI) have
also drawn on Heidegger and the concept
of availability, these studies have
focused on physical availability.
訳してください。お願いします。
お礼
御回答 毎度 有り難うございます。 ubiquitousというような難しい単語も使って、全体的に皮肉っぽい文章の様に感じられ、言わんとしている事は何となく理解出来たのですが、ボキャ貧の私には、日本語で表現するのに苦労しました。 しかしこの皮肉は、犬君に失礼？な表現なと思います(笑)。 ニューヨーク市にはもっと扱い難い哺乳動物である人間がもっと多く存在している、 と思います。