Encountered in a french hotel lately. With the flat affordance of screens, TVs can get a status update through this sort of frame. Supposed to be classier? or to fade in the background.
On a more ironic glance, it can look as the deification of TV.
A recent interview of Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto by Chris Kohler (Wired) deals with alternative game controllers employed with casual/sport applications:
"I'd always wanted to try to find a way to make a game out of that, and I felt that with the Wii, that's something that I would normally do in the bathroom is weigh myself. But, with the Wii, if there was a way that we could take that into the living room and turn it into an experience that everybody takes part in, then that might be fun.
What about the timing of this device seems auspicious right now? Does it have to do with the acceptance of alternative controllers now?
I think there are a couple of reasons. One is that at this point the Wii is wireless, and so I think the fact that it's wireless certainly makes it easy to use. For me, personally, also, in this NES era, I myself didn't really think that weighing myself and tracking my progress every day is something that I could turn into a game. (...) initially we created the Balance Board in order to create Wii Fit, and it was essentially designed to enable that experience. And, then after we finalized the design, we looked at it and realized -- or as we were finalizing the design, we realized it could potentially be something that could be used for other games, as well. And, so in finalizing those designs and finalizing the final Balance Board, we ultimately tried to do it in a way that would enable other developers to also take advantage of it. The other thing that we found is that actually in the sports world there are devices that are somewhat similar to this that are used for training athletes. (...) there's actually a game out already called We Ski. It's a skiing game that uses the Balance Board that's developed by Bandai Namco. (...) Using a Wii remote, you could track the timing of the swing and the shifting of the balance on the Balance Board to calculate kind of how good the swing is. Of course, there's still the question of whether or not the mass market would want a game that perfectly replicates that type of an activity. But, in terms of golf training, you could certainly do something like that.
Is there a danger of maybe burning people out on extra controllers?
we are creating a number of different controllers and peripherals for the Wii, as well, so in that sense, I can see your point of how having so many different controllers can be a little bit inconvenient. But, at the same time, we feel that the videogame audience has gotten to the point now where it's so broad that there are different tastes and different needs within people, within the audience of people who are playing the videogames. (...) when we're designing games and designing peripherals, we're not designing them for the purpose of simply creating more devices to use with the Wii. We're trying to create devices that are creating a more streamlined and intuitive approach to gaming so that a broader audience can feel that they're able to interact with and better use the device."
Why do I blog this? great lessons here, with good connections to some current research about tangible interactions. There are good things to wonder about concerning the relationships between the user experience and different use of tangibles interactions. For instance, the "direct mapping" rule is often perceived as the best solution for intuitive apprehension of games. Using the same movement in the physical space as the one rendered in the digital world is indeed a relevant approach but is it that simple? is it that fun? is the movement so physical that it becomes less fun? And what about the overemphasis on gestures, playing soccer by doing gestures which are not a direct translation from the physical to the digital (yes I am thinking about PES on the Wii with its click-and-drag system)?
On a different note, the scale-turned-into-game-platform reminds me of 2 projects which focused on transforming everyday objects into game controllers: Everyday games by Are Hovland Nielsen and Control Freak by Haiyan Zhang.
So, as it seems, the new "big thing" is consider "everyone as a monitor" as attested by this article in the Economist. Some people now claims that "The sheer ubiquity of mobile phones amounts to “the biggest leap in history, bigger than the printing press, which, after all, stayed in the hands of very few people,” (Katrin Verclas from MobileActive.org). Although I am not sure about this, it does not dismiss the whole issue. The article interestingly addresses the different modalities of such a "monitoring" feature: be it explicit (people take pictures, shoot videos, send messages, etc.) OR automatic. As they say in the E, "this is now on the horizon" for the good (participatory urbanism for instance) or the bad ("a coming surveillance state"). Funny enough, this article appeared in my RSS feed reader right next to this other one by Bruce Schneier on Wired which basically states that "What happens to our data happens to ourselves / Who controls our data controls our lives". Why do I blog this? quick references for later. It's again the tension between explicit versus automatic sharing of personal information, a topic I am interested in.
Reading this interview of Daniel Dociu on BLDGBLOG, I was intrigued by a comment from Greg Smith about the relationship between gaming and architecture:
"Seeing real discourse about gaming in an architectural context is very exciting for me. Architecture tends to have stock discussions about gaming: the eternal resuscitation of the Situationist International and the expected conversations about 3D modeling. The winfall in thinking about gaming is much bigger when you consider the medium without being crippled by these limitations. While I do appreciate the fine art of "level design" I think the real prize in comparing gaming and architectural design is the exploration of simulation, interface and play (the latter of which is to gaming as programme is to architecture). (...) what interests me the most is how the medium ties into the history of architectural representation. Given the intimate relationship between architecture and "viewing apparatuses" (from the panorama through orthogonal projection on the drawing board) gaming can be read as the latest in a procession of technologies and techniques for constructing images and ideas"
In an insightful blogpost, Greg Smith also discusses this topic. He mentions two interesting projects relevant for that matters:
(A example of Echochrome)
Why do I blog this? I find this topic interesting and touched it last year during my year at the Media and Design Lab. It's good to think in both directions: what urbanism/architecture can bring to game design and how game design can influence urbanism/architecture. And it's not only about aesthetic concerns. The "Space Time Play book is a good resource about this topic.
Also, what does this mean in reality? are there signals of echochrome-like structures in the physical space that would allow parkour-like interactons? See for example the following example that I've already mentioned in this blog:
Fabien wrote a comprehensive summary of his "Real-Time Cities Round Table". He basically gathered a good bunch of experts that influence the visions of real-time cities with whom they talk about "the issues, promises and implications inherent to their development".
The whole report is a valuable+pleasant read and I would only highlight the conclusion as it uncovers an interesting approach:
"The very diverse attendance at the round table clearly reveals that the real-time city touches many disciplines. Yet which trans/inter/undisciplinary skill sets will allow the researchers and practitioners present to understand how to shape the cities they intervene in? It could start by offering alternate hypotheses instead of ignoring the input of colleagues across the table. For instance, most of the research works discussed around the table are going beyond blindly pursuing technological possibilities. They take their source of get informed by social research to define the computational problems and potential solutions. To form a coherent research avenue, there is a need to go beyond bringing together researchers from different disciplines to work in multidisciplinary teams. It could languages of multiple disciplines"
Why do I blog this? because the table sets the agenda for interesting research projects I'd like to work on, and because the proposed approach in conclusion is refreshing.
Taken form Designing for People by Henry Dreyfuss (pictures found here):
Why do I blog this? just find intriguing to look at these anthropometric representation of hands (and the physical dimensions) and think about how they can be connected to the user experience of tangible interfaces (using gestures for example). How does the physical dimensions can count in the effort to create a relationship between a physical object, users and digital representations. Certainly good elements Julian, innit?
In The convergence of alternate controllers and musical interfaces in interactive entertainment, Tina Blaine examines the emergence and acceptance ofof alternate/breakthrough game controllers.
She starts off by describing how the game industry is seeking new ways to extend the “gamer” demographic or attract new players and that "many consumers are intimidated by traditional video game controller devices" (which was the rationale behind the Nintendo Wii but the paper is form 2005). She then focuses here review controllers for music applications. She shows how alternate controllers have achieved status as a critical component of gameplay, resulting in more fun user experience. Limiting her reasoning to music game controllers, she concludes that:
"In all of these systems encumbered or not, the players’ physical interactions appear to enhance the feeling of immersion in the games and distract from varying degrees of latency inherent in the responsiveness of the sesystems. Generally, the latency is less noticeable at easier levels of gameplay and doesn’t become problematic until faster execution at more advanced levels is required. Until studies inthis area are conducted, it remains a mystery as to whether or not players are content with controllers that lack complexity but are simply fun to play. (...) opportunities have arisen for third party developers to provide “unofficial” spin-off versions of controllers as accessories for games. These are often offered more inexpensively at the same or higher quality as the large developers, and bypass the need for consumers to purchase software in order to get an extra hardware device."
People interested in knowing more should read the paper and focus in particular on Table 1 that interestingly compares videogame toy devices (Beatmania, DDR...), the purposes of the controllers, the actions that can be performed, the effectiveness as well as the "musical expression intention".
Why do i blog this? collecting new material about gestural interactions for a research project. To some extent, the paper advocates for the benefits from having a "Convergence of Alternate Controllers and Musical Interfaces". It would be good to do the same analysis with sport/arcade game controllers (from power glove to the bodypad) and analyze the idiosyncrasies of each activities (physical or musical).
Blaine, T (2005). The Convergence of Alternate Controllers and Musical Interfaces in Interactive Entertainment. Proceedings of NIME 2005: 27-33
Definitely a fan of Antonin Fourneau’s Overloaded Joystick (here):
A short excerpt of the text written by Douglas-Edric Stanley about the artist and the exhibit shed some more light about it:
"When I look at some twenty-odd buttons of all sizes joyfully scattered about a controller, I can only read in it a boyish call to the gaming industry: “please someone, come and bring some joy back into this stick”. In this way, Antonin has stolen that ladybeard and placed it on top of his own, thereby redefining his own — very French, and very devilish — form of a wink, which is both innocent and sophisticated, all at the same time." (Douglas-Edric Stanley)
There's this interesting post by Paul Graham on distractions and time sinks (tv-then-internet):
"Something that used to be safe, using the Internet, gradually became more and more dangerous. Some days I'd wake up, get a cup of tea and check the news, then check email, then check the news again, then answer a few emails, then suddenly notice it was almost lunchtime and I hadn't gotten any real work done. And this started to happen more and more often. (...) The problem is a hard one to solve because most people still need the Internet for some things."
So what to do?
"At first I tried rules. For example, I'd tell myself I was only going to use the Internet twice a day. But these schemes never worked for long. Eventually something would come up that required me to use it more than that. And then I'd gradually slip back into my old ways. (...) The key seems to be visibility. The biggest ingredient in most bad habits is denial. So you have to make it so that you can't merely slip into doing the thing you're trying to avoid. It has to set off alarms.
Maybe in the long term the right answer for dealing with Internet distractions will be software that watches and controls them. But in the meantime I've found a more drastic solution that definitely works: to set up a separate computer for using the Internet. (...) If you try this trick, you'll probably be struck by how different it feels when your computer is disconnected from the Internet. "
Why do I blog this? interesting hint about work practices. It reminds me of a friend working in a big aerospace company where no personal computers are connected to the Internet (for security reasons) and where people have to go to an Internet computer (yes, in 2008).
Although I agree with the time-sink problem and suffer from it myself, I am still wondering about the definition of "work" Graham have. There are indeed different definition of work: - need to be connected to newsfeeds. - looking for intelligence, reports, material, hints, stats, etc. This requires first-hand sources or second-hand sources, search engines, tagging systems... - ...
(Picture taken from my temporary office in a swiss train)
And there are of course different recombination of work allowed by networks: - look things up on the google even for crazy things such as checking grammar (google fight), looking for a reference in a paper, etc. - need to access definition (wikipedia or urban dictionary!) - share and work on documents: Google Docs/Spreadsheet for example - use of certain websites to "compute" things, for example, I have few urls like that one to compute statistic things on-lines - communicate with people using Skype/Google Talk, etc. - update agenda - find picture on Flickr to illustrate a talk
Of course, all of this results from the choice I made (with colleagues) to use on-line tools. Personally I find more efficient to split my time between different moments/activities and places:
All of this separated by breaks (walking, jogging, dreaming, taking weird pictures).
An IEEE Spectrum article recently tackled the notion of "kill switch":
"According to a U.S. defense contractor who spoke on condition of anonymity, a “European chip maker” recently built into its microprocessors a kill switch that could be accessed remotely (...) If in the future the equipment fell into hostile hands, “the French wanted a way to disable that circuit,” he said. Spectrum could not confirm this account independently. (...) So what's the best way to kill a chip? No one agrees on the most likely scenario, and in fact, there seem to be as many potential avenues of attack as there are people working on the problem. But the threats most often mentioned fall into two categories: a kill switch or a backdoor. (...) A kill switch is any manipulation of the chip's software or hardware that would cause the chip to die outright (...) But other experts counter that such ideas ignore economic realities. "
Why do I blog this? well, nothing in mind in particular, it's just that the notion of "kill switch" is intriguing from a design/ux POV. What does that mean for designs? What does that mean for users? Are there any kill switch in consumer electronics? It also reminds me of secret levels/cheatcodes/hacks in videogames or hidden graphics in Disney movie.
Anyone interested in the relationship between technologies and contemporary cities followed the release of Grand Theft Auto IV. Tom Bramwell from Eurogamer recently interviewed Aaron Garbut from Rockstar. The following part sparked my interest:
"We never reproduce real world locations. We take interesting or representative elements and create something new from them. It's about taking inspiration from real places and producing something that captures the essence of it. We're trying to take our impression of New York and keep it as that, an impression, not a laboured reproduction. I think that gives it more flavour, more intensity and in an odd way makes it feel more real. I've seen it in other games that set out to rebuild a city street by street, not only do compromises get made that favour realism over fun but a lot of the life is lost and all that's left is a hollow representation of a real place. I'd rather have the right vibe than an accurate roadmap. (...) The cities are never built specifically with missions in mind. We always build the cities first and fit the missions and stories into them. There are a few reasons for that. One of the main ones is practical and it's more pronounced on a new engine. The basic rendering parts of an engine tend to come online a lot sooner. The mission designers need a scripting language, fairly evolved physics and vehicle handling, the weapon systems, AI etc before there is much they can play with. Whereas the artists have 3D software from day one and the game can start rendering that quickly so we can get on with building the city right from the start.So we've always treated the cities like a real place. We build them, we pack them with interesting things and then we place the missions within them at a later date. Obviously once a mission is placed and working we will tweak the area to work better, but essentially the processes are fairly separate. That's not to say there isn't a deliberate intention to evoke emotional reaction as you say. It's just that if there is one it's happening during the placement and pacing of the missions. I think having this massive environment available first gives a lot of opportunity to play with the missions and find what works best."
(Excerpt from a GTA IV map)
Why do I blog this I find extremely interesting to see the spatial thinking behind the level design of GTA IV as described here. There are good parallels to draw between the game designers and urbanists as both of them have to build/transform an "environment" where "things will happen", filled with various sorts of agencies. The approach level designer take, as described by Garbut, is of course different. More specifically the purpose is not make a city efficient but instead about how to engage players in fun and free interactions. That said, I am sure that there are relevant ideas to pick up.
LBS 360 has a good overview of European Mobile Mapping Trends summarized by Michael Fisher. The whole piece is about how Mobile Network Operator (MNO - or "carrier") perceive the field and will be likely to shape it in the near future. I was mostly intrigued by that part:
"Privacy issues, as you would expect, arise when offering most any location service and especially social networking related services. It would seem that offering FREE services raises skepticism instantly in some areas of Europe. This coupled with advertising and social networking appears to raise further concern. Many European government organizations have officially weighed in on the topic as a means to educate the public and declare rights associated with data protection and the power to audit organizations providing location-based services. In the case of network location-based services, this only applies to the carrier, as this technology only takes raw network data from the carrier and returns a more precise location back to the carrier.Another major privacy matter looms on the horizon in Europe regarding intelligence that can be derived from mobile advertising; it is known as "behavioral tracking." Simply said, advertisers would benefit greatly from understanding not only what ads are most popular but where customers responded to these ads. For the most part, it's no different here than in the United States - addressing public concerns of privacy is a matter of education and documented disclaimers. "
Why do I blog this? although I don't know which data supports the various claims here but there are some good thoughts about people's perceptions related to privacy issues. In particular it's relevant to note that "free" services raise more eyebrows.
The recent story of Google cars causing stir in Rome still makes me wondering about the perception of so-called "urban computing" and citizens. To put it shortly, the problem was basic: Google recently brought in black cars in Rome that take pictures for the Google Streetview project (yes at some point you have to physical artifacts taking PICTURES of streetviews, it's not just virtual). BernhardWarner for the timesonline hence reports the following people's reaction to these black cars:
"On cue, pedestrians shuffled off the street and into bars, out of sight of the offending vehicle, no doubt wondering if these are the new intrusions that must be endured after a sudden shift to the right. Your correspondent managed to snake through a queue of cars at a traffic light to get a better look at the vehicle that upset so many mid-afternoon espressos. (...) Just then the Google car swung left and I followed, in a very slow pursuit. The identical scene unfolded before me: Romans stumbling into shops and bars, hoping to be out of view of the camera's lens"
In a sense, they perceived it as "a new type of video surveillance vehicle". I won't enter into the details of the explanation provided by the timesonline (the election of a right-wing mayor... who wants to promote tough-on-crime platforms) but this situation seems certainly revealing of a troublesome relationship between technological assemblage.
The picture of the google cars in the Netherlands made by Lars van de Goor shows how the whole pack can be intimidating:
Why do I blog this? what I find interesting here is less the perception of a service (that can be articulated as "urban computing") but instead the sort of experience of the infrastructure needed to provide a service. A flock of all-similar black cars wandering around the city with huge camera-devices may indeed by an intriguing experience as it may came out from the blue. Will we see more of this sort of encounters in the city of the near future?
Btw, Mauro were in you in Rome? have you seen this?
Recently, I've been involved in a research project about game controllers, comparing different peripheral (gestural or not). This led me to investigate the evolution of game controller over time, a topic already addressed by others. For instance, Damien Lopez made this insightful mapping (.pdf) for both consoles and portable systems:
Lopez describes this map as a "a collection of small multiples of game controllers of the main gaming systems from the past 25 years (..,) normalized, and the hands are all approximately the same size as each other, and thus the controllers all to scale". His point was "to show the progression of controller design throughout the last quarter-century. With the introduction of the Nintendo Entertainment System, no more number pads were used on game controllers from that point on".
On Sock Master, there is also a tree-based representation that tries to connect all the current console controllers with their predecessors. What is interesting here is the notion of diachronic evolution as well as the connection between different "families".
Why do I blog this? working on the user experience of game controller for different research projects, this kind of representation are important as they map the existing peripherals as well as show how the possibilities evolved over time. It's overall interesting to note the relative stability in both portable and console shapes but the increasing complexity of controllers. Although sticks remains stable, the number of buttons increases. It would interesting to see how the user experience evolved over time too and see how it's related with the interface. I need to dig more these graphics and draw some implications about what that means.
Been interviewed recently by Alfons Cornella and Doris Obermair for spanish website Infonomia, the conversation is here. A short excerpt where I make my point (about the near future of urban computing) that the important thing is less about technology than human needs:
"¿Cuál es el futuro en este campo? Si hablamos de las ciudades del futuro, no debemos pensar en tecnología, sino en las necesidades humanas, en lo que la gente quiere en lugares específicos. ¿Quieren circular mejor, conocer a gente que comparte sus mismos intereses, o, por otro lado, simplemente quieren que se les deje en paz y estar inaccesibles? Se trata de ciudades basadas en los deseos de la gente, más que de ciudades donde la tecnología se lanza sin más y la gente no entiende lo que está pasando."
Via, geolocated animals are now more and more common (after pigeon blogs back in 2006), the most recent example is this deer named Thor that blog his own position on Google Earth. What is interesting in this case is not the animal blogging meme (although it's yet another example) but the underlying process: a "Mail to Map/SMS-to-Map/Mail to Google Earth" process as described by the developer:
Also intriguing this "importance notice" by the guy who set up this whole thing:
"Important notice: since the displayed coordinates belongs to a live animal (currently a white-tailed Deer nicknamed Thor), by reading this page and looking at the map you are accepting terms of agreement: “do not harm the animal in anyway’. Actually it lives on private grounds or a preserve territory anyway."
Yes, people, remember: although it looks like a virtual environment, it's a real deer.
Why do I blog this? I like the "blogject tracking" via email dimension here.
Given that we spend more and more time communicating with non-humans, the topic of politeness with bots, robots, virtual characters, non-playable charcters in video games has always struck me as intriguing. Few months back, I mentioned the chatbot technology and call centres where "it will be also necessary to program chatbots to deal with verbal abuse"". The new issue of Interacting with Computers is about this topic: "Abuse and Misuse of Social Agents". Two papers I found interesting in that issue are:
"I Hate You: Disinhibition with Virtual Partners" by Sheryl Brahnam:
"This paper presents a descriptive lexical analysis of spontaneous conversations between users and the 2005 Loebner prize winning chatterbot, Jabberwacky. The study was motivated in part by the suspicion that evidence in support of the Media Equation, especially in the field of conversational agents, was supported by incomplete data; too often omitted in its purview is the occurrence of unsavoury user responses. Our study shows that conversations with Jabberwacky often bring about the expression of negative verbal disinhibition. We discovered that 10% of the total stems in the corpus reflected abusive language, and approximately 11% of the sample addressed hard-core sex. Users were often rude and violated the conversation maxims of manner, quantity, and relevance. Also particularly pronounced in the conversations was a persistent need of the user to define the speakers' identities (human vs. machine). Users were also curious to understand and test the cognitive capabilities of the chatterbot. Our analysis indicates that the Media Equation may need qualifying, that users treat computers that talk, less as they do people and more as they might treat something not quite an object yet not quite human."
and "Sometimes it's hard to be a robot: A call for action on the ethics of abusing artificial agents" by Blay Whitby:
"This is a call for informed debate on the ethical issues raised by the forthcoming widespread use of robots, particularly in domestic settings. Research shows that humans can sometimes become very abusive towards computers and robots particularly when they are seen as human-like and this raises important ethical issues. The designers of robotic systems need to take an ethical stance on at least three specific questions. Firstly is it acceptable to treat artefacts - particularly human-like artefacts - in ways that we would consider it morally unacceptable to treat humans? Second, if so, just how much sexual or violent 'abuse' of an artificial agent should we allow before we censure the behaviour of the abuser? Thirdly is it ethical for designers to attempt to 'design out' abusive behaviour by users? Conclusions on these and related issues should be used to modify professional codes as a matter of urgency."
Why do I blog this? this is not a research topic I investigate more than looking at few papers once in a while but I am quite fascinated by this sort of behavior and the design implications. Perhaps it's linked to my interest in the user experience of automation: when human agents are replaced by robots or chatbot, one can observe intriguing issues at stake for "users".
The next step, something that I would be very interested in observing, is to study when people kick, punch or break physical objects such as roomba, robots or vending machines. There is definitely something here that I'd be happy to investigate more deeply like... figuring out the reasons (role of context? bystanders? mood?), finding the consequences (broken? not yet?), the need to fix the device (oneself? with others?), the justification to others, etc.
I mean, EVERY device can be the target of this sort of behavior. I remember having a Commodore Amiga 500 which used to go "green screen" (the equivalent of Windows blue screen of death); to make it reboot, I use to raise it like 5 centimeters on the table and drop it. It worked pretty well on me (I had to to relieve some nervous steam) and the Amiga as well. I learnt recently that it allowed one of the chip which was not well inserted to be properly reinserted.
Right after reading Dan Hill's recent post about transport fare system this morning, I had to bring a friend to a tram stop here in Geneva and I had an interesting discussion with what I would call the local "vending machine proxy/broker". Transport ticket machines in Geneva are actually a bit complex: the interface is a pain (with buttons without any uses, two little screens, two slots to swipe a care), the pricing is also difficult to understand and to choose (for instance the zoning is not very well described and reflected in the interface). Plus: the ticket does not give back change (it gives you a sort of ticket that you can use to claim your money back at counters). We discussed that example during the LIFT08 workshop about design failures, talking how this situation leads to frustration and waste of time or money since lots of people choose to avoid paying.
That said, the most interesting phenomenon is the presence in some key tram/bus spots of "proxy ladies" who help people to buy a ticket. They generally take your change, ask you where you'd like to go and use their transport card to get the ticket. The thing is that when you buy a "cartabonus" card for X transport then you can get one free (as that lady explained me). They can then make a few amount of money using that trick and help angry or clueless Geneva visitors.
What's interesting here is that the lady is NOT an agent from the transport company. She's a freelance proxy to the machine, or "broker" with customers. The whole system itself generated this opportunity to make a little amount of money (incentive for the broker) AND help customers who definitely need a hand.
Why do I blog this? following closely what happen with "urban interface", I find this example fascinating, especially when you think about it was not planned by the machine designers, how it was a by-product of the bad design+pricing system. To me, that's a very important example to be understood if one wants to design relevant "urban computing" applications. The presence of a human helper is tremendously interesting here. Although this only happens in crowded transport spots (like the railway station), there are lessons to draw here about "urban interface" in contemporary cities.
Spending time with that lady is fantastic, especially if you consider that she speaks a sort of mix of french and portuguese AND she still manage to help people finding the right ticket to go to a specific zone. Furthermore, the whole transactions between some customers and the "proxy lady" are a very rich terrain to investigate people's mental representation of the city and how they can be translated into an interface (or a need to have a human face to help them!). Through a discussion with the customer, the proxy lady seems to help him/her transferring the representation of the wanted location (its image-ability) in the zoned map printed on the vending machine, and thus, to choose the right button to buy the correct ticket.
