Tag Archives: Marcelo Coelho

Too much intelligence in your clothing? (wearable tech: 3 of 3)

While having intelligent clothing is not an immediate prospect, it is definitely on the horizon according to Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher Marcelo Coelho. Speaking at an EmTech Conference Brazil (a series of conferences held by MIT Technical Review in various parts of the world). A Nov. 19, 2015 article by Sebastian Smith  published on phys.org discusses intelligent clothing,

One of the most promising areas is clothing that integrates computers and can practically think for itself.

“You can program your shirt for it to change color, or move to a different pattern,” he said. “Maybe you’re at work today and want your shirt one way, but you’ll be at a party tonight and want it different.”

Another creation is a dress with a hemline that rises and falls—or another dress, decorated with gently opening and closing flowers.

“Transforming dresses” is an idea that was profiled in an Oct. 20, 2006 article by Rachel Ross for MIT Technical review (Note: A link has been removed),

Turkish fashion designer Hussein Chalayan is known for his innovative ideas. Earlier this month [October 2006], he wowed the audience at his Paris runway show with five dresses that automatically transformed in shape and style. Zippers closed, cloth gathered, and hemlines rose–all without human assistance. Beneath each model’s skirt was a computer system designed by the London-based engineering and concept-creation firm 2D3D. Rob Edkins, director of 2D3D, talked to Technology Review about how the computers controlled the clothing with motors and wires.

Technology Review: What was your vision for the clothes in the latest Chalayan show?

Rob Edkins: He gave us a series of drawings: five dresses which morphed through three decades. Together with him we developed a means by which we could move the dresses into the various shapes of those three decades. It took a lot of R&D before we arrived at a solution.

With the first dress, the girl walked on in a 1906 costume, and it morphed from 1906 to 1916 and then to 1926. So she ended up having a beaded flapper dress of the twenties. The next dress was from 1926, and it evolved from 1936 to 1946, and so on. The final dress was 1986, 1996, and then 2007. So there were five dresses, and each dress [morphed through] three decades.

A lot of [the transformation] was unbelievably subtle. While you were watching something happen down around her waist, something else was happening on her shoulder. A little fabric might roll up and become a sort of half sleeve.

Another scientist (pulling the discussion in a somewhat different direction) was profiled in Smith’s article,

…  [In answer to the question, where is this all going?] another MIT scientist, Skylar Tibbits, [says the answer] is self-assembly.

No, not self-assembly as in struggling with instructions and wrenches over a bed you just bought in a box. Tibbits means self-assembly as in the thing—the bed, or whatever it may be—assembling itself.

This is the idea of 4D printing, Tibbits’ specialty.

If 3D printers can produce three-dimensional objects at the touch of a button, 4D means they then go on to transform or organize themselves in useful ways.

Unlike robots these materials are not computerized and do not need power like electricity. They react to ordinary forces like pressure or heat or water and change, but are engineered by the scientists so that they change shape in a pre-determined way.

Neither scientist was presenting new ideas for anyone who’s been following recent developments in emerging technologies but for an audience of people who haven’t this is likely exciting and, perhaps, a bit disturbing. (Well, that was my response when first encountering these developments.) As for clothing that’s more intelligent than its wearer (or out of control), it doesn’t seem to have been mentioned in the presentations but perhaps the possibilities should be considered.

EmTech México 2013

MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) produces an annual emerging technologies conference (EmTech) on its own home ground of Cambridge, MA and also in India (mentioned in my Mar. 5, 2010 posting; scroll down 2/3 of the way), in China, in Spain (mentioned in my Oct. 28, 2011 posting; scroll down about 1/4 of the way) and, of particular interest to me, in México.

The ‘nanotechnology’ bombings in México in 2011 and in early 2013, mentioned most recently in my Mar. 14, 2013 posting, provide an interesting backdrop to the upcoming conference (EmTech México 29-30 mayo, 2013 • Ciudad de México).

The speaker list for the conference is, as expected, heavy with MIT faculty but it also boasts someone I’ve featured here from time to time, Tim Harper of Cientifica. Here’s the description they have for Tim (from the EmTech México speaker [biography] page),

Tim Harper es uno de los principales expertos en la comercialización de nanotecnología y de tecnologías emergentes. Le interesan además la biología sintética, la medicina regenerativa y la geoingeniería.

Harper es un emprendedor, inversor en tecnologías emergentes y asesor gubernamental en materia de estrategia tecnológica. Es fundador y CEO de Cientifica, la empresa más respetada a nivel mundial en materia de información nanotecnológica y pronósticos meteorológicos. Harper fue cofundador de la empresa Nanosight, donde desarrolló un innovador sistema de detección de nanopartículas.

Perteneció al  equipo de  ingenieros de la Agencia Espacial Europea en el centro de I+D en Norrdwijk (Países Bajos). Allí contribuyó decisivamente al lanzamiento del primer microscopio de fuerza atómica en el espacio, donde nunca se había analizado el polvo cósmico.

En 1999, Harper organizó en Sevilla (España) la primera conferencia del mundo sobre inversión en nanotecnología. Desde entonces dirige con éxito el World Nanoeconomic Congress en cuatro continentes. En el año 2002 fundó la European NanoBusiness Association, una sociedad sin ánimo de lucro cuyo objetivo es promover la competitividad europea en materia de nanotecnología.

I gather the conference will be held  in Spanish. My skills in this language are almost nonexistent but relying heavily on my poor French, here’s a rough translation of the first paragraph,

Tim Harper is an expert on the commercialization of nanotechnology and other emerging technologies. He also maintains a professional interest in the fields of synthetic biology, regenerative medicine, and geoengineering.

Here are a few of the other speakers listed on the EmTech México conference’s Ponentes page,

  • Jason Pontin, Director de MIT Technology Review
  • Mario Molina, Premio Nobel de Química (1995)
  • Niels Van Duinen, Director de Desarrollo de Negocio Internacional de Philips Lighting
  • Carlo Ratti, Director del grupo Senseable City Lab en el MIT
  • Marcelo Coelho, Diseñador e investigador del grupo Fluid Interfaces en el MIT Media Lab
  • Juan Pablo Puerta, Director de Ingenería, Etsy
  • Marisa Viveros, Vicepresidenta de Cyber Security Innovation de IBM

You can check out all of the Emtech conferences on this page.

One last note, MIT has its own baggage viz the recent suicide of Aaron Swartz. This essay on Wikipedia offers one of the more neutral descriptions. I’ve excerpted the introduction, (Note: Links and footnotes have been removed),

Aaron Hillel Swartz (November 8, 1986 – January 11, 2013) was an American computer programmer, writer, political organizer and Internet activist.

Swartz was involved in the development of the web feed format RSS,[ the organization Creative Commons,] the website framework web.py and the social news site Reddit, in which he was an equal partner after its merger with his Infogami company. Swartz also focused on sociology, civic awareness and activism. In 2010, he became a research fellow at Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Research Lab on Institutional Corruption, directed by Lawrence Lessig. He founded the online group Demand Progress, known for its campaign against the Stop Online Piracy Act.

On January 6, 2011, Swartz was arrested by MIT police on state breaking-and-entering charges, in connection with the systematic downloading of academic journal articles from JSTOR. Federal prosecutors eventually charged him with two counts of wire fraud and 11 violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, charges carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines plus 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution and supervised release.

On January 11, 2013, two years after his initial arrest, Swartz was found dead in his Crown Heights, Brooklyn apartment, where he had hanged himself.

MIT president L. Rafael Reif has since ordered a review of MIT’s role in the tragedy noted in the Wikipedia essay and elsewhere. The essay on Aaron Swartz offers a fairly comprehensive overview of Swartz’s life and accomplishments, as well as, his legal situation and the circumstances surrounding his death.

A suicide is a complex event and it is not possible to hold any one person or institution to blame, tempting as it may be. Nonetheless, it must be said that it seems oddly dissonant that MIT which prides itself on its technological advancements  and membership in an elite, forward-thinking research community would be party to an action where prosecutors seemed more intent on punishment than on any principle of law relating to research and its dissemination. Whatever one thinks of Swartz’s actions, it is clear he was acting out of a spirit of civil disobedience (trying to set publicly funded research free).

In fact, the emerging technologies of yesteryear are have social impacts today such that the ways in which we view research and the scientific process are changing prompting questions such as ‘Who gets access to information and ideas?’ and, as  importantly, ‘When?’

I wonder if any of these events, the multiple bombings in México and MIT’s role in the Swartz case and suicide will have any sort of impact on this conference. I doubt it; there wasn’t a single philosopher on the speaker’s list.

Jason Pontin

Director de MIT Technology Review