A new "Calm Technology" certification aims to highlight digital products and services designed to be less intrusive and demanding of users' attention. Developed by Amber Case, the creator of the concept, the certification evaluates products based on criteria like peripheral awareness, respect for user attention, and providing a sense of calm. Companies can apply for certification, hoping to attract users increasingly concerned with digital overload and the negative impacts of constant notifications and distractions. The goal is to encourage a more mindful approach to technology design, promoting products that integrate seamlessly into life rather than dominating it.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) publication, Spectrum, has reported on an emerging initiative known as "Calm Technology Certification." This certification aims to formally recognize and promote technological designs that prioritize user well-being by minimizing distractions and fostering a sense of tranquility in the user experience. The underlying philosophy of calm technology, as articulated by Amber Case, emphasizes the seamless integration of technology into our lives, allowing it to recede into the background rather than constantly demanding our attention. The proposed certification process, spearheaded by Case and her organization, Esanet, involves a detailed evaluation of a technology's design and its potential impact on user attention and focus.
This assessment includes scrutinizing various aspects of the user interface and interaction, such as the frequency and nature of notifications, the visual and auditory stimuli employed, and the overall cognitive load imposed on the user. The ultimate goal is to identify and endorse technologies that exemplify the principles of calm technology, empowering users to engage with technology in a more mindful and balanced manner. The certification serves as a signal to consumers and developers alike, highlighting products and services that prioritize a respectful and harmonious integration of technology into daily life, as opposed to those that contribute to digital overload and attention fragmentation. While the certification is still in its nascent stages, it represents a significant step towards a more conscious approach to technology design, one that prioritizes human well-being and seeks to mitigate the potentially negative consequences of excessive digital stimulation. The hope is that this initiative will encourage broader adoption of calm technology principles across the tech industry, leading to the development of a more human-centered and less intrusive digital environment.
Summary of Comments ( 36 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42780953
HN users discuss the difficulty of defining "calm technology," questioning the practicality and subjectivity of a proposed certification. Some argue that distraction is often a function of the user's intent and self-control, not solely the technology itself. Others express skepticism about the certification process, wondering how "calmness" can be objectively measured and enforced, particularly given the potential for manipulation by manufacturers. The possibility of a "calm technology" standard being co-opted by marketing is also raised. A few commenters appreciate the concept but worry about its implementation. The overall sentiment leans toward cautious skepticism, with many believing the focus should be on individual digital wellness practices rather than relying on a potentially flawed certification system.
The Hacker News post titled "Calm tech certification 'rewards' less distracting tech" generated several comments discussing the concept of "calm technology" and the proposed certification.
Several commenters expressed skepticism about the feasibility and effectiveness of such a certification. One commenter questioned the practicality of defining and measuring "calmness" in technology, suggesting that what one person finds calming, another might find annoying. They also raised concerns about the potential for the certification to become a mere marketing ploy, with companies using it to greenwash their products without meaningfully addressing the underlying issues of distraction and attention hijacking.
Another commenter argued that the focus should be on empowering users to control their digital environment, rather than relying on companies to self-regulate. They advocated for tools and features that allow users to customize notifications, filter content, and manage their digital interactions. This perspective emphasizes individual agency and control over a top-down certification process.
Some commenters discussed the inherent tension between the business models of many tech companies and the principles of calm technology. They pointed out that many companies profit from engagement and attention, creating a conflict of interest when it comes to designing less distracting products. This raises the question of whether companies are genuinely incentivized to create calmer technology, even with a certification program in place.
A few commenters also discussed the broader societal implications of constantly connected technology. They expressed concerns about the impact of digital distraction on mental health, productivity, and interpersonal relationships. While not directly addressing the certification itself, these comments highlighted the underlying problem that calm technology seeks to address.
There was also discussion about the specific criteria that might be used to evaluate calmness. Suggestions included limiting notifications, reducing visual clutter, and providing clear and concise information. However, there was no consensus on what the ideal metrics should be.
Finally, some commenters drew parallels to other certification programs, such as those for energy efficiency or organic food, questioning whether a similar approach would be effective for calm technology.
Overall, the comments reflect a mix of skepticism, cautious optimism, and pragmatic concerns about the proposed calm tech certification. Many commenters acknowledge the need for less distracting technology, but question whether a certification program is the most effective solution. The discussion highlights the complexities of defining and measuring calmness, the challenges of aligning business incentives with user well-being, and the importance of empowering users to control their digital experiences.