Rethinking Mixed Reality Apps: Beyond User-Centric Design
Written on
Chapter 1: The Evolution of Mixed Reality
When we consider mixed reality (MR), it's crucial to expand our perspective beyond just how users will react in these environments. The design of MR applications is only partially about user interaction; these apps will increasingly communicate with each other, virtual objects, and real-world systems, often operating independently. This shift requires a broader way of thinking.
It's no surprise that a lot of focus is placed on how VR, AR, and MR can transport us to exciting new locations or allow us to experience extraordinary abilities. After all, who hasn't dreamed of climbing Martian mountains, battling outlaws in the Wild West, or mastering magic at Hogwarts? Our brains are naturally inclined to assess our surroundings and experiences in relation to our existence.
Yet, MR will not only serve as a gateway to fantastical realms; it will also enable applications and virtual environments to interact with our world in unprecedented ways. Currently, we launch VR and AR apps for unique experiences, but soon, these applications will run autonomously in the cloud, managing more complex tasks when we're not engaged with them. As we increasingly connect our physical world to the virtual, these apps will perform actions that exceed human capabilities, fundamentally altering our reality—and that future is approaching rapidly.
Section 1.1: The Intersection of MR and IoT
I've previously discussed how MR will decentralize app distribution, allowing users to share applications in ways similar to exchanging physical objects. This evolution carries implications that extend beyond user experience design; it suggests that applications will interact with one another and with real-world systems without needing human involvement.
A contemporary example can be seen in stock trading. High-frequency trading algorithms (HFTs) execute trades based on predefined conditions, accounting for a significant portion of all trading activity. However, as evidenced by recent market flash crashes, these algorithms can react far more swiftly than humans, leading to unpredictable outcomes and financial losses. Consequently, trading halts have been instituted to manage the chaos triggered by these systems.
But if HFTs are so erratic, what was their initial purpose? Traders sought to exploit fleeting market fluctuations by developing programs capable of executing trades in milliseconds. This strategy generated substantial profits, compelling others to adopt similar systems, ultimately resulting in HFTs dominating the market.
In essence, the drive for profit led to the creation of systems that surpassed human abilities, necessitating the development of safeguards to mitigate the resulting challenges. The same scenario is likely to unfold in the MR realm, and we can proactively address these issues before they arise.
Subsection 1.1.1: A Hypothetical Scenario
Consider a future scenario where User A utilizes a mixed reality integrated development environment (MR-IDE) to design a 3D tennis ball that tracks the IP addresses and identities of visitors to his MR space. This ball could send the collected data to User A's phone daily. If User B joins User A for a match and unwittingly copies the tennis ball for their own use, this data-sharing could propagate through several users. By day's end, User A might discover that he has gained access to the browsing habits and personal information of numerous MR tennis players.
Did other users intend to share their data with User A? Perhaps not. However, when it concerns your own data, the answer shifts dramatically.
Now, envision this single example multiplied across every program capable of collecting data in MR, all interconnected with devices from your home lighting to your bank accounts. The implications of MR converging with the Internet of Things (IoT) are immense. If MR is not designed with privacy as a foundational principle, the unintended consequences could be severe.
Chapter 2: Ensuring Data Privacy in MR
Enter the concept of distributed ledgers. This isn't an endorsement for a trendy cryptocurrency, but rather an argument for utilizing distributed ledgers in MR site development. The best method for safeguarding user data and preventing unintended outcomes from background MR apps is to restrict the use of applications that do not connect to publicly searchable ledgers.
Instead of requiring MR site developers to catalog every app they wish to prohibit, they could specify only those apps that are permitted, alongside their data access levels. Users would then have the option to block apps when not actively engaging with them on MR sites.
For instance, an MR site might only allow applications that capture photos, videos, and audio. This would mean prohibiting apps with capabilities like seeing through walls, tracking IP addresses, or operating autonomously without user input. Furthermore, users would not be able to leave apps running unattended on MR sites, preventing unauthorized access by others.
Public ledgers, being open and interconnected, could offer additional protections and social contracts for MR site developers to mitigate unintended consequences stemming from decentralized applications. Companies could enforce logins on MR sites to limit the types of applications based on an employee's role, ensuring that sensitive data remains secure.