I don’t have anything particularly insightful to add to the news that MoMA has acquired 14 video games for its permanent collection, apart from a hearty “hurrah!” and slight confusion about what it means for a museum to “acquire” a video game. Luckily, MoMA’s Paola Antonelli comes to the rescue on that last front, writing a detailed post on the museum’s blog:
In order to be able to preserve the games, we should always try to acquire the source code in the language in which it was written, so as to be able to translate it in the future, should the original technology become obsolete.
Then of course there’s the issue of curating the backend of the game (the part that arguably contains the creators’ true creativity), the code. Writes Antonelli:
We request any corroborating technical documentation, and possibly an annotated report of the code by the original designer or programmer. Writing code is a creative and personal process. Interviewing the designers at the time of acquisition and asking for comments and notes on their work makes preservation and future emulation easier.
Then there are the rights issues, which can only be legion. So it’s not perhaps as simple a slamdunk as you might have imagined, and hats off to MoMA for recognizing the artistry and genius of the likes of Pac-Man, Katamari Damacy, and The Sims (with Pong, Asteroids and Donkey Kong still to come.)
[Pac-man image via Flickr/methodshop.com.]
![Shyam Sankar, a data intelligence agent working at Palantir, gave a great talk at TEDGlobal which took on the topic of human computer symbiosis. He cited J.C.R. Licklider‘s notion of intelligence augmentation, and wanting humans and machines to cooperate, not battle each other unto the death. In Human-Machine Synergy, Ben Lillie captured Sankar’s energetic talk, while in The Story Behind The Slides, I talked to Collin Roe-Raymond, lead graphic designer at Palantir, about the process of putting together a really beautiful presentation.
[Image c/o Palantir]](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6jfmyaUFm1qikpxao1_1280.jpg)

![For A Creativity Boost, Think Outside The Box… Literally reveals results published in Psychological Science magazine in which researchers tested whether *actually* working outside of a box might have any impact on creativity. On the basis of this admittedly small-scale experiment, it seems to.
Of the three groups being tested, one sat in a 5’ by 5’ cardboard box, another sat outside the box, and the third group performed the task without there being a box being in the room at all. I know, it sounds slightly ridiculous, but those sitting outside the box performed much more ably than the other two groups.
This article doesn’t give too much detail, but we know that the design of space has a huge impact on creativity, and we’re always looking to improve them, so for me this provided an interesting thought to mull for the day.
[“Super Cool” cardboard box image by Tuppus on Flickr. Story via Audrey Clarke.]](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lzwt3m6wQ51qikpxao1_1280.jpg)
