As Donna Haraway advised in Staying with the Trouble, the solution may not be a solution in itself. Rather, we can use the problem as a compost (here I imagine technological „cagadas“ literally translated as „technological turds“ which means „technological screw-ups“) to plant new forms of affect. In this text I wrote about some non-utilitarian initiatives around the problem of „engineered oppression and imperialist logic embedded in mainstream software“ that you mention. Here is a list of them:
- From Artistic Practice: The Library of Missing Data
- From Activism and empathy: Domestic Data Streamers
- From the Poetics: Myriad (Tulips)
- From Speculation: Xenoimage Dataset
The conclusion of the texts goes in this direction: The justice in the content of a dataset has to do with politics. When we do politics, we try to convince someone that one solution is better than another. If what we do is to show imaginary scenarios, we don't need to convince anyone, but it can be used as a guide. We can ask open questions like: 'what would you, with your convictions, think in that scenario?' Not having enough imaginaries is what can lead to hegemonic and discriminatory thinking. Devising operational protocols that make it possible to hack the hegemonic visual imaginary through the refunctionalization of image databases can serve to activate the visual future in the field of the disruption of hierarchies, relying on AI as a new sensorial tool for visualization and starting from a xenofeminist perspective. Algorithmic reprogramming will be through hyperstitional operators: tools that serve to think other futures in which identity traits are not eradicated but deactivated as motors of oppression and inequality; speculative futures that resist and imagine beyond the consummation of the automatic organisation of life.
feedback by Winnie
Thanks for this..i like the writing and the positioning to bring out non-west perspective and references, (also ways of doing). Just some minor comment -
1. perhaps the network protocols is also been as important part of computational system in addition to hardware and software
2. minor: decoupling it from big tech platformization and the commodity of the Cloud. -> decoupling it from big tech platformization and cloud commodification. -> but i also think the essence of the issue is also centralisation of power or oligopoly structure
3. though i am unsure if returning to retro computing frameworks is simplistic, as it is also a way to reflect technologies via histories and older technologies. Or you have any example in mind about what specific retro framework?
4. I am still intrigued by our earlier discussion on Operating system as an object of study to unfold some of the concern. Look forward to hearing your presentation.
Thoughts from Pierre
Super interested in your last paragraph, with alternate practices that do not stem from the same social/cultural/economic environment as the dominant technologies you call out.
The part of technical proficiency is also an interesting one to investigate, I think: doesn't it act as a barrier to decentralize/produce alternate infrastructures? Do those decentralized infrastructures require everyone to "learn to code" (if only a little bit) in order to maintain and care for these infrastructures?
Interoperability is also an interesting question to me: I think that decentralization without interoperability sounds like a sort of silo-ing of communities and practices? Or is that just fine?