I will just say that this week labs were failed by me. We were supposed to learn how to control servomotor and speaker using analog output. I didn't have force-sensing resistors, so I tried to use potentiometers and phototransistors instead. In some cases, the motor and buzzer worked and in some - they didn't work. But I never was able to control them with phototransistor and potentiometer. And because I know so little about C and C++, I don't understand whether the problem was the code or the circuit. Although I read and watched all the materials, I still couldn't figure out the problem.
I tried to do that for the whole day and in the middle of it I went into a bit of emotional breakdown. So I was just staring through the window for almost an hour thinking that I'm not good enough for the ITP program and I won't succeed in New York city. At some point I remembered that I have the undergraduate in psychology and that it also took me some time to be good at that. And if I'm surrounded by so many brilliant people in my cohort, I must be brilliant in something as well. Maybe just not in PComp and that's alright.
To sum up this rather emotional experience, I will quote Thomas Edison who said: "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work". And I for sure did find a lot of ways that my circuit won't work.
For my first project, I want to do a guitar simulation but instead of the strings there will be switches. Hence, it would remind more of a mini synthesizer. I'm planning to program the speakers to play the chords I choose (Still don't know how to program any speakers, but oh well). The final idea is that I can sing a mix of a variety of songs using this device. As many songs use the same chords, I'm planning on using that to my advantage.
Summary: I'm honestly happy that I tried, and I would regret if I gave up right at the start. I'm aiming to identify the problems and make these circuits work, so I will update the post when (not IF) it happens. I'm also excited about trying to implement my project idea into life.
Comments on readings:
The article "The US Navy will replace its touchscreen controls with mechanical ones on its destroyers" by Andrew Litpak wasn't surprising to me. I believe some systems are too complex to implement modern tech designs there. Especially when lives of the people depend on the system. When using modern tech like touchscreens to control the ships, it's important to use mechanical system as well, in case the touchscreen fails. Any technology is nothing without the people who are using it and developing it. Thus, when it fails us, we are the only ones responsible for that.
Another article "There Is No “Technology Industry”" by Anil Dash was confusing for me. I agree that technology industry is such a broad term that today it should encompass anything related to the use of technology. For some reason society's view were shaped not to see airlines as included in "Technology industry" and call Uber a technology company. What confused me was that Anil basically rejected the current views and provided some explanations about how the views are perpetuated. But the author didn't really propose a more suitable system of the way the society can call different companies that use technology. In Russia there's a saying "If you reject something then propose something instead" because otherwise you're not changing anything. The situation or the problem stays the same.
Commentaires