Morlock Elloi on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 08:51:23 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> DiEM25 Green Paper on Technological Sovereignty

To quote myself from the ideology & the infrastructure paper ( ):

"The ideology of the infrastructure goes deep and is often invisible to the involved actors. The participants generally believe that they are doing the best possible job. What is specific to engineering is that the governing ideology is often internalized as a technical issue, and is so presented to the insiders and the outsiders. The presumed difficulty to understand technicalities is used as a barrier to shield the ideology from the outsiders. The baffling part is that it also works on the inside. It is extremely hard to penetrate this construct and separate the ideology from the technology: the amount of its inherent nonsense can shame any belief system known to man. Yet it must be done."


"Perhaps the most sinister aspect is that it captures the energy of activism, which adopts the ideological canons and builds the same dystopian constructs, on the premise that they are now operated by the good guys, as if an Open Source cage is anything but a cage. The underlying fallacy, that the power will be used only for good purposes, becomes obvious always too late, when the energy and trust have been exhausted. Thus the useful idiots complete the ecosystem and seal it against the alternatives."


On 1/25/20, 11:35, Luke Munn wrote:
Hence the quotes - I suppose I could have added "ostensibly" in there.

Of course data infrastructures and the wider technological industry are
highly political in constructing imaginaries, appropriating funding as you
noted, aligning with public and private interests, shaping the flows of
data, etc etc. But as I've been reading so much of this industry 'grey
literature' for the last six months, its very much still pervaded by
discourses of performance, efficiency, flexibility, optimisation - with
companies as service providers. So the simple point here was just that it's


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info:
#  archive: contact:
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: