영상/음향 모두 소니 RX100으로 기록. RMN 그랑빨레 앞의 거리 음악가에게 심심한 감사를.

This American Life (TAM)은 2010년 캄보디아에 다녀온 뒤로 듣기 시작한 포트캐스트 라디오. Bryan이 당시 내가 듣던 스튜디오 수업에 도움이 될 거라 생각했는지 보내 준 아이티 에피스드 링크를 시작으로 듣기 시작해 이제까지 아마 100편 가깝게 들은 듯. 청소하며 설거지하며 듣기 좋고, 가끔은 눈물이 쏙 빠지게 웃기기도 하고 가끔은 깊은 생각에 빠지게도 해 준다. 물론 영어에도 도움이 되고. 아래는 그 중 TAL 초보들에게 추천하고픈 기억에 남는 에피소드 몇 편.

173: 세가지 속임수, 두번째 이야기. Deceiving Others.
뉴욕의 변호사 Graham이 컨츄리클럽에 초대되는 동료들만 승진하는 것을 보고 한 고급 컨츄리클럽을 경험하기 위해 자신의 직업을 잠시 버리고 버스보이로 취업하는 이야기. 듣기

385: 조사, 첫번째 이야기. Psycho Dabble.
어린 나이에 살해혐의로 체포되어 정신병을 가장했다고 주장하는 젊은이. 그는 정말 싸이코패스일까 아닐까? 아마 가장 무서웠던 에피소드. 듣기

411: 첫 만남, 첫번째 이야기. Error at First Base.
가장 처음 들었던 에피소드 중 하나, 그리고 다섯번 이상 들은 유일한 에피소드. 화면이 있는 영화와는 다르게 영어 라디오가 안들려 힘들었던 기억이. 스탠드업 코미디언 Birbiglia가 자신의 첫 입맞춤 이야기를 들려준다. 듣기

432: 물러날 때를 알기, 첫번째 이야기. Gin Rummy.
알콜중독을 대하는 첫번째 그리고 마지막 원칙은 ‘포기하지 않는다’. 하지만, 술을 마시는 것을 허용하는 보호소가 있다고 한다. 듣기

483: 자기계발 킥, 두번째 이야기. Some Like it Dot.
혼두라스 대통령의 보좌관인 젊은 이상주의자 Sanchez는 어렸을 때 부터 국가의 모든 문제를 없앨 묘안을 가지고 있었다 – 모든 것을 처음부터 시작하면 어떨까? 그러던 와중 세계적인 경제학자 Romer의 TED 프레젠테이션을 들은 그는 그의 계획을 실행에 옮기기 위해 Romer와 힘을 모은다. 듣기

제 블로그에 이런 글을 올리게 될 줄은 몰랐네요. 제가 당하고 나서 제 친구들에게도 같은 메시지가 나가고 있어 찾아보니 영문으로 된 뉴스는 있는데 한글로 된 뉴스가 없어 이렇게 올립니다. 2월 1일자로 Hyphenet에 올라온 기사에 따르면 이번이 처음은 아니라는군요. 무한 알티 부탁드립니다.

어제 오랜만 한 친구에게서 트위터 다이렉트 메시지가 왔습니다. 메시지는 정확히 이렇게 생겼습니다.

저 위의 bit.ly 링크를 누르면 이런 화면이 보이실겁니다. 빨간 동그라미로 표시해 준 주소를 자세히 보시면 Twitter가 아닙니다. 저도 주소를 확인하지 않은 통에 당했습니다. Image courtesy: Hyphenet.com

표시해 준 주소를 주의하세요. Twitter가 아닙니다. 저도 주소를 확인하지 않은 통에 당했습니다.

다이렉트 메지시이기 때문에 비밀번호를 넣어야 한다고 생각하고 비밀번호를 넣으면 안타깝지만 당하신겁니다.

이 화면을 보셨다면 당하신겁니다. Image courtesy: Hyphenet.com

몇 초 후, 이 가짜 페이지는 속은 유저들을 확실히 속이기 위해 진짜 트위터 페이지로 브라우저를 이동시킵니다.

이동한 진짜 트위터 페이지. Image courtesy: Hyphenet.com

클릭하지 마시고 비밀번호를 입력하지 않으시는게 최선입니다. 클릭을 하셨다면 주소창을 반드시 확인하세요. 하지만 벌써 이 일이 일어났다면 다음을 따르세요.

0. 비밀번호를 당장 변경하세요.
1. 다이렉트 메시지를 보내신 분께 계정이 해킹당했다는 것을 알려주시고,
2. 그 다이렉트 메시지를 트위터에 신고하시고,
3. 메시지를 지우세요.
4. 팔로워들에게 트윗으로 이 문제(그리고 이 포스트)를 널리 알려주시고,

외국 IT 사이트들을 주시하고 있다가 추후 진행상황 공유하겠습니다. 제 트위터 아이디가 보낸 스캠에 당하신 분들께 진심으로 사과드립니다.

이리호, 뉴욕 버팔로 시청 근처 해변에서

지금은 자주 연락하지 않지만 옛날에 자주 나를 한강에 데려다 주었던 고마운 친구가 있다. 내가 심란하다고 하면, 혹은 본인이 심란하면 아버님 차에 나를 태우고 한강변에 가곤 했다. 어쩌면 그렇게 자주 있었던 일이 아닌지도 모른다. 내 기억이, 고마움이 그 횟수를 부풀린지도. 우린 주로 늦은 시간에 봤고 한강변에 가서 캔 커피 따위나 마시며 이런 저런 이야기를 나누곤 했었다. 그 친구에게 미안해 말을 꺼낸 적은 없지만 사실 난 어두운 강변에 앉아있는 것으로 마음에 위안을 받은 적은 없었던 것 같다. 아니 한번쯤은 있었다고 해도 기억이 나지 않는다고 하는 것이 정확할까.

처형과 동서가 사는 뉴욕 버팔로에서 여름을 보내고 있는데, 시내를 둘러보다 시청 근처의 이리 호 가까이 가게 되었다. 마주하고 있는 태양이 아주 강했는데 마침 바람이 우리쪽으로 아주 강하게 불고 있었다. 분명 바람이 불지 않았다면 땀이 날 만큼 높은 온도였는데 강한 바람 덕에 덥지도 시원하지도 않았다. 그 묘한 미지근한 따뜻함에 왠지 위안 받는 느낌이었다.

옛날 태국 한 여행지에서 통통배 스노클링을 한 적이 있다. 얼마간의 돈을 주면 작은 통통배에 몸을 싣고 처음 만난 십수명의 사람들과 해변에서 좀 떨어진 곳에 가서 스노클링도 하고, 배 위에서 선장이 해주는 볶음밥도 먹고, 나중엔 상어 양식장도 가보는 일종의 패키지 상품이었던 것으로 기억하는데 나중에 해변으로 다시 돌아오는 시간이 얼마나 걸렸는지 기억나진 않지만 배에서 일하는 태국 선원 중 한명이 사다리를 타고 배의 지붕으로 올라가는 것을 보고 따라 올라갔던 기억이 있다. 느리게 양쪽으로 흔들리는 통통배의 지붕에 누워 낮잠을 자는 그 직원을 보고 나도 반대편에 웃통을 벗고 덜렁 누워 잠을 청했다. 서너시쯤 부드러워진 태양 아래 흔들 흔들 덥지도 시원하지도 않은 통통배 나무 지붕에서의 낮잠. 이리 호 앞에서 그때가 떠올랐다.

Hyunsun hanging it

By Hyunsun.

I got thing hung up there. Can you find it? It looks like a tennis ball.

Hyunsun waiting for the birds to come to eat the food. That’s why we hung two where we can see from our flat.

Workers at Foxconn, image courtesy: NYTimes.com, click to see the original article

We all have known this for a while. 
For quite a while. It’s not like we did not know that there are people in China–actually not only in China but also in Thailand, Vietnam, wherever the labour is cheaper and the regulation on worker’s right is loose–and we have taken it for granted. Let’s ask ourselves: have I not known that there are people in other countries who work so hard for so little compensation, and some of them–actually many of them–get ill because of the chemicals they unprotectedly use for fabrication efficiency, or the impossibly long hours? Did I not hear the word “sweatshop” ever? Maybe it’s time to think about it. This radio show helps empathize.

No sweatshop, no iPhone.
Actually, the whole iPhone business model is built around it. When iPhone 3 was released no one in the industry could believe its price tag although it was the most expensive phone back then. According to a credible source who works in the mobile phone industry in Korea, Apple preordered 40 million iPhones at once to make it cheaper. No wonder that they are still selling–which is funny word for this as it is free of charge including shipping with two year AT&T contract–iPhone 3Gs. The tragedy at Foxconn premises and Apple’s nice offer on their nice website are only different sides of the same coin.

iPhone 3Gs for free on Apple.com, retrieved on 19 January 2012. iPhone 3G and 3Gs were released on July 11, 2008 and June 19, 2009 respectively. Click the image to enlarge

Some claims that Apple fabricates iPhone not in the US but in China to save “only” 26 per cent of the manufacturing cost. Whether true or not, it’s not “only” 26 per cent, any manufacturer will go to China if they can save by a matter of a cent. Besides, 26 per cent of manufacturing cost means, literally GO or NO GO for a business model, and hence no Foxconn and no China means no iPhone. Well, no Galaxy Tab, no Kindle, no Vaio either.

The whole world is being built around it.
It’s not only Apple. Nike has been notorious for its poor welfare for its suppliers. Believe it or not Nike’s initial business model was to import cheap Japanese shoe to US market and beat US made shoe. Think of IKEA, H&M, Zara, Muji, and try to remember where they are made. All of them are selling Californian, Swedish, Spanish, Japanese lifestyle made in, and by hands of others. No sweatshop, no Nike, no IKEA, no H&M, no Zara, nor no Muji. Not that I am saying that they wouldn’t exist–they would be much smaller that they are now, and there must be many more smaller companies that offer alternatives.

Then why is only Apple being targeted? Is it because Apple is so fancy and seems more successful than the others now, or is it because Apple is more evil? Again, don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to dilute the blame for Apple. What I am saying is that we shouldn’t be on the hype, blaming Apple for now, and forget about the whole thing and go back to where we are, which we shouldn’t.

Nike sweatshop in 90's, image courtesy: www.businesspundit.com

It’s not only electronics or fashion. Ceramics, cooking ware, furniture, even food and magazines in high volume. It’s all built on faster, better, cheaper, more economy model in which we “consumers” increasingly consume forever, and what the world expects is that those people in China and elsewhere will get capability of buying things and become a new group of consumers that will help the sluggishly developing economy in the developed countries. It can’t go forever, and there are growing evidences. In fact, there have been bright minds that talked about the limits to growth from early 70′s, we’ve just been uninformed, uninterested, and/or ignorant.

It’s not only the consumerism.
It’s not only the consumerism, but also globalization, and hence our governments’ policies whether they promote growing conglomerate and export, or helping start-ups and entrepreneurship. It’s only natural for any corporations to try to save costs and dominate the market by providing the same or better products and services at lower price, and it is easier job for bigger corporation. Look at the curricula in management schools, it’s all about–at least a big fraction of it is–ensuring more efficiency. In other words making anything cheaper anyhow–cut employees out, moving manufacturing to China, outsourcing everything that seems not essential, creating shared services offshore–doing it all at even lower cost.

Now, try to order a few hundred anything you designed for fabrication in China. You will hear a firm NO if you’re lucky, otherwise you won’t not even get to see or talk to a person. Still a few hundred is a big risk for a start up! So, all this business model is only possible for a company larger than certain size–and the certain size is becoming larger and larger all the time. Does your countries cut taxes for large corporations? Well, mine does, which is no good. Do your politicians say that it’s the only to revitalize the economy? Well, vote for others next time. What is more, with such big corporations offering cheaper and cheaper products, consumers become more and more price-sensitive while they are buying what they do not really need.

What can we do? 
Many. Not that I am saying you can change Apple’s or Samsung’s supplier overnight. But you can be influential for many other things. Here are some ideas I can immediately think of. Feel free to join and contribute!

1
Don’t buy–unless you really really need it. Look at your desk, don’t you have so many things that you don’t use after only a while? A digital camera that you bought because it was cheap? A pair of sunglasses because it was cheap? A polaroid printer that prints digital images as if it was taken by a polaroid? I mean, come on.

2
Look for 2nd hand–before look for a new one. What about dishes, forks, spoons, sewer, rice cooker, microwave, folders, furniture, rugs, or books? There are so many products that are being landfilled as they are not demanded. And it’s fun to hunt for 2nd hand! At first you will tend to collect a lot of crap, but you’ll get better! There are growing groups of people and initiatives that promotes reusing. Reuse is certainly better than recycle, and definitely must better than landfill.

3
Be aware where things are made when you have to buy new product–and look around, there always will be small companies that make products in your country. By doing number 1 and 2, you will have more money to afford things that are made in your country or where the corporate responsibility and employee welfare mean a little something more. Plus, you will indirectly help encourage people to get on creating new businesses that is healthy not only for your local economy but also the global economy!

4
Use what you have carefully and for a long time–otherwise donate if you do not use it. A big fraction of the stuff being landfilled is still usable, and in almost perfect conditions. Fix it if it’s possible, and donate if you are absolutely sure that you don’t need it anymore. There are whole other people who might look for exactly what you’re throwing away!

5
Finally, support small companies that are trying to promote local labour–buy their products, help them by giving them useful feedback. They will appreciate it much more than big corporates. Can you really get your voice heard to the decision makers in big companies anyway?

Hope this was helpful, and your contribution on the post is always welcome.

This is the courtyard of the building I have lived in. I’ve loved it, thought I still do not know what the brick building is for. I am certain that no one lives in it.

It was a warm winter day. Hyunsun and I used to walk this street to the shore. Very nice, calm street with a small park and a church on the side. An office of Genelec, the manufacturer of highly regarded active loudspeaker systems especially for professionals, is on the right hand side.

A cold winter day … I think it was probably something like -20 Celsius.

Kaivopuisto, one of the oldest and best known parks in central Helsinki, becomes a snowed desert in the winter.

Scaffolded. Hyunsun and I have lived through the long renovation of getting the outside walls re-plastered, cutting half the staircases out, and getting elevators into the building. It is only sensible that our landlady giggled when we told her that we will move out. Well, significantly cheaper rent is always a good motivation.

Hyunsun’s waiting for me walking back from the garbage bins.

Old buildings. This woud be what I would miss the most. You just walk around and what you see is these incredibly opaque architecture well-suited to the climate–cold, cold winter. Indigenous.

10 mins walk brings you to Hernesaari. Thought I am not a big fan of the newly built apartment complex, but this I like. A well-suited empty space for everyone.

Karaoke Bar Restroom right by the Church. Oddly well-suited.

Probably from somewhere around Laivurinkatu 35. You can barely see Viisikulma, the five corners which a really cool Finnish contemporary jazz band is named after.

All photographs here are made with Minolta CLE, Summicron-C 40mm f2, and mostly Kodak GC 400.

Design has long been considered a problem solving discipline since the Industrial Revolution. Mass production: we’ve become able to produce goods that existed for long–like textile and plates–in ever-larger quantity with new means of production. The industry faced a problem and required people who can give new shapes to products that are desirable to their customers, technologically feasible, and economically viable to the business¹. By the beginning of 20th century design faced a new sets of problems: how to give shapes to products that never existed before. Toaster, radio, TV, and washing machine were newly introduced and to be designed interesting, desirable, affordable, easy, and safe. From 1940’s more advanced corporations began to compete with brand propositions, where design has faced a new set of challenges. Over time, design has evolved embracing anything required–usability, material science, cognitive science, ergonomics, ethnography–to solve the problems before us.

Interestingly enough, Critical Design, one of the newly emerging approaches in design, positions itself at the opposite side of conventional design that, according to Dunne & Raby, is affirmative to the status quo. They claim to “use design as a medium to stimulate discussion and debate amongst designers, industry and the public about the social, cultural and ethical implications of existing and emerging technologies”². They further elaborate what they do through a/b (2009) that critical design is problem finding, functional fiction, provocation, rhetoric, and makes us think, as opposed to problem solving, fictional function, innovation, ergonomics, and makes us buy. They drew a clear line between critical design and the other.

The argument of Dunne and Raby is sensible as design has been traditionally affirmative to the given challenges. We designers conventionally–and conveniently–start working by receiving a brief one way or the other. But, what if the problems were not framed properly in the first place? What if the problem was targeting the symptom of a problem not the source of it? We try to wiggle out and create impact by expanding the scope, but the point of commission has become already downstream of the project, and there is only so much we can change upstream. Consequently we may end up–and often we do–putting awful lots of effort to deliver right answer to the wrong questions.

Conventional approach in design. Important design decisions are already made by clientele, and designers have put a great deal of effort to devise affirmative answers to the question.

I would argue that Critical Design and conventional one shall not be the two unconnected, but parts of a continuum as the attempt of Critical Design is not to only discuss what has not been being discussed but eventually to alter the reality for the better by helping people see the unseen. One of the ways to go upstream, certainly, is critical approach discovering and communicating the undiscussed as criticism by definition naturally implies that there is a fault or a mistake in a rationale of a solution, of a system, or of a society. But, how does criticism contribute improving the reality if the newly found problems are separate from problem solving? Obviously there is a weak link between criticism and reality if there is no connective tissue. By comprehending both problem finding and problem solving as integrated work we may witness the expanding responsibility of designers in designing pathway to a preferred future.

Problem solving and problem finding are parts of a continuum

Working upstream, we may come up with radically different projects with lasting impact.

Within that, we also need to design briefs–design brief, architectural brief, project brief, et cetera–upstream in order to alter the reality. If we consider a design solution to be a result of consecutive decision making, we can say that important design decisions are already made in creating the brief. Accordingly, we ought to participate in–or even unsolicitedly initiate–creating the brief in order to create lasting impact to the preferred future.

–