In the prototype, the computational state is returned to the physical environment through a buzzer. Initially introduced as a practical substitute for the unrealised movement of the curtain, the buzzer already constitutes an environmental response. Its sound leaves the computational system and enters the shared sensory environment, becoming perceptible to the bodies occupying the room.

The prototype therefore completes the operative sequence: body → sensor → count → computational rule → environmental response

The proposed curtain would complete this sequence differently. Rather than changing the sonic environment, it would change the spatial conditions themselves: the amount and configuration of space available to the bodies inside. Translation therefore does not only reduce. It produces new possibilities by changing the form through which a relationship can operate. An interruption can become a count; a count can acquire a computational consequence; and that consequence can return to bodily experience as sound or, potentially, spatial movement.

Haggerty and Ericson describe bodies under surveillance as being "broken down into a series of discrete signifying flows.” Their systems can gather those fragments and construct what they call a data double. Mine does something much smaller. There is no double of me inside the computer. There is an interruption. A direction. A number.

1 - This used to bother me because it seemed like a terrible description of a person. But perhaps description is not what the system is doing. It is translating. My body does not become data because the computer has somehow captured me and compressed me into a smaller version. The encounter begins differently for the computer. It doesn't know that I hesitated before entering. It doesn't know that I recognise somebody inside. It doesn't know that I'm uncomfortable with how close everyone is standing.