Path Finding
After my 6.034 (Artificial Intelligence) class let out a bit early today, I had to make a trip over to the bathroom. Now, in the building (Stata Center) where I have that class, that bathroom (and indeed, the entire building) is very particularly designed, and the stalls in the bathroom are very particularly arranged. It just so happens that the stall that I went to was occupied by another person. I started thinking: what exactly are the considerations that a guy makes when he’s picking out a bathroom stall? Do these conditions change when choosing a urinal? These questions, inevitably, led to myriad other equally nonsensical formulations and conjectures about how people go about walking and sitting the way they do.
As with any imperfect solution to a complex problem, our path finding algorithms occasionally fail us. On my way to 7.012 (Biology) lecture, I noticed a person stop dead on his tracks, and after a brief pause, let out a long, frustrated “ffffffffff-”, the beginnings of a drawn out expletive seemingly expressed through the deflation of his hopes of getting to class on time. Often, the problem isn’t finding an optimal (or any) path to a destination, but finding an optimal seating position in a class, or the least awkward urinal in the bathroom. Surely, I can’t sit too close to the front, and risk looking overly enthusiastic about learning, nor can I sit too far back and look like a deadbeat who’s only there to catch up on the sleep he missed because he was playing Super Smash Bros. And surely, sitting immediately adjacent to someone I don’t know is right out, unless, of course, that someone is an attractive individual whom I might want to introduce myself to. If I arrive late to class, I certainly cannot walk all the way across the room to sit; I take the nearest available seat instead.
It’s an interesting question for me, sitting here between classes and watching people pass by: finding destinations, empty seats, power outlets for their exhausted laptop batteries, the best tastiness/(time*cost) ratio for a late breakfast, the most amusing company for an evening’s debauchery.
When you boil everything down, people, in all of their irrationalities and idiosyncrasies, do actually operate based on real motivations and principles. I make no guarantees as to the quality or consistency of said motivations and principles, but behavior is generated by something. Even “random” behavior in people isn’t truly random. Tell a room full of people to arrange themselves randomly, and they wind up spacing themselves out, instead of truly randomly. +10 points to the first person who points out that reference. Note: points cannot be redeemed for cash, food, favors, or just about anything except self-empowerment.
Or maybe I’m just thinking too hard.

