1. Well, I guess I can say you heard it here first, the NY Times has a nice article, by Mary Jo Murphy, talking about the design of wind turbines and their recent ubiquity in eco-advertising. When it’s the NY Times, they interview Seth Godin, who mentions how the wind turbines as icon that works because it is more about the infinite supply of energy over reducing demand and consumption. Murphy raises a good point that, the wind turbines is still more about hype than results, and is “both of and ahead of its time,” and that its ultimate success is still undetermined. [via Frank.]

2. I need to create a category, “what made me a dork in the 80s is cool now.” Bow Wow and The Game are continuing the history of the rap battles.  Only this time, they are putting up $100,000 (proceeds go to charity) to settle things the real way, by playing Madden NFL 09.

3. I love early internet history. NSF is putting your tax dollars at work with this interactive history of the internet. It’s all their ARPANET, NSFNet, Mosaic and TCP/IP.  The best feature shows the number of the computers on and the speed of the internet for each decade, (1960s had 4 computer at 400 baud.)

4. Speaking of the early days of the Internet, Noah made a sweet iPhone ringtone of a dail up modem.

5. Back to the present, Timo Paloheimo created Google Minus Google to find out what Google would be without Google. The site serves up Google search results which filters out Google owned properties, such as YouTube, Blogger, Gmail, Knol and Orkut, and thus removes any inherent conflicts of interest. [via Core 77]

6. I recently did a Google search on the actually Google page. Usually, I just type my search terms in search tools built into Firefox and Camino. Both do a nice job of trying to predicting my search terms as I type.  However, the Google search box now offers the results too, so you can widen or narrow your search terms before your first try.  You know, the one that takes 0.16 seconds. Am I the last person to notice this? And in true frienemy form, I must admit that it is nice that even if Google is the dominant search engine, they are still innovating in their core business, even in small ways.

I’ve been to the Home Delivery show at MOMA twice on sunny weekends this summer. The show on prefabricated architecture is overall well curated. However, the true brilliance of the show is that they have full scale models of six homes. The all steel Lustron house is in the indoor portion of the exhibit. The others five are constructed in the parking lot next store to the museum. Architecture exhibits rarely show full scale buildings for obvious reasons, which relegates museum shows to drawings and models. Normally, to see architecture you have to go to the actual sites, which makes comparing structures challenging. But here, you get to experience multiple examples at full scale.

Of all the architects that were invited to show, the most remarkable was Housing for New Orleans, designed by Larry Sass of MIT. He researches new fabrication techniques using CAD and digital laser cutting. His houses are constructed from numbered jigsaw-like pieces which can be assembled with a rubber mallet, hot glue, and the occasional crow bar. The first prototype took five students to build over two days, however this example was erected with three people over two weeks. The individual pieces are small as compared to the normal two-by-fours that are normally associated with building houses, as seen in the details images. This iteration of his research 196-square-foot one-room shotgun house for post-Katrina New Orleans . The application of his techniques to the housing crisis caused by Katrina is also noteworthy, especially as related to my interesting in ethical design and prefab architecture.

Sass’ impressive approach to architecture comes from a completely new starting point, that is born digital. The designs are created using fabrication and cutting techniques which utilize the strengths of computation for something greater idea. Despite this use of technology, I was reminded of Japanese Shinto Temples, which use a centuries old technique of interconnecting wooden joints that do not require nails.

Unlike much of the work of say, Gehry, computation is not used to build once impossible complex structures. Rather, Sass’ research seems to be more about rethinking how to one goes about building a house (Housing for New Orleans, could be build without the use of computers.)  In his House for Katrina, there is a balance between shelter and ornament. The structure provides protection from the elements, while the flourishes still invoke local styles and nod to the human need of aesthetics and having their home relate to an surrounding architectural context. Although, I’m sure many people feel the ornamentation (and the structure itself) is a poor substitute to the grand architectural styles of New Orleans, there are limits to the not only his construction methods, but also what can be reasonable built during disaster relief.

Weeks later, I’m still thinking about the relationship between computation and architecture, and how Sass both makes architecture more abstract and more concrete. The abstraction comes from the reliance of the computer to design and cut the material. However, in the actually physical act of building, the methods allow a few people (instead of a team of builders and suppliers) to construct a house with a minimal set of skills and tools. Computation’s ability to make something simultaneously abstract and concrete is not all that new, but I’ve never seen the idea applied to architecture, which makes the discovery all the more exciting.

Image source: LifeStraw

Even though I haven’t posted much recently (sorry for that, especially when I got some nice links, Thanks Noah. Frontstudio.) I have been thinking a lot about the ethics of design. One post from Rob Walker’s murketing blog that has kept with me, which I’m finally able to post. Walker mentions luggage companies trying to design an airport security friendly laptop bag. Anyone who travels with a laptop knows the pain of having to take out the computer to be x-rayed. What was most interesting was an aside he made:

“(Okay, okay, it’s not the LifeStraw — it’s an annoyance problem instead of a mortal one, but still.)”

The LifeStraw is a hand held, point-of-use water filter, which is an amazing product. So, yes, Walker is correct is asserting that a laptop which makes it easier to get through airport security may not save lives (but it does help everyone in line.)

The question then is, how ethical is ethical? In defining an ethic of design does a product or service have to be life saving for it to be ethical? Be made of ompletely sustainable materials? Have a zero carbon footprint?

The answer, I believe, is no. However, what this implies is that there is a spectrum of ethics in a design. The big question is what are the metrics of that spectrum of the ethical.

Image source: flickr

I’ve been busy helping organize a workshop, which means of course less time for blogging. But I’ve noticed that in the midst of long 3 hour planning sessions, we take breaks to check email. We also got a request from one of the people we’re recruiting to help us to insure that there would be time for email breaks.

It would seem that email breaks are the new cigarette break. While the latter causes lung cancer and the former doesn’t, it is still a vice. Our need for continuous connectivity and up to the second status reports makes the act of unplugging just as unnerving for many as nicotine withdraw.