Big Data, Algorithmic Regulation, and the History of the Cybersyn Project in Chile, 1971–1973

Katharina Loeber

doi:10.3390/socsci7040065

Abstract

We are living in a data-driven society. Big Data and the Internet of Things are popular terms. Governments, universities and the private sector make great investments in collecting and storing data and also extracting new knowledge from these data banks. Technological enthusiasm runs throughout political discourses. “Algorithmic regulation” is defined as a form of data-driven governance. Big Data shall offer brand new opportunities in scientific research. At the same time, political criticism of data storage grows because of a lack of privacy protection and the centralization of data in the hands of governments and corporations. Calls for data-driven dynamic regulation have existed in the past. In Chile, cybernetic development led to the creation of Cybersyn, a computer system that was created to manage the socialist economy under the Allende government 1971–1973. My contribution will present this Cybersyn project created by Stafford Beer. Beer proposed the creation of a “liberty machine” in which expert knowledge would be grounded in data-guided policy. The paper will focus on the human–technological complex in society. The first section of the paper will discuss whether the political and social environment can completely change the attempts of algorithmic regulation. I will deal specifically with the development of technological knowledge in Chile, a postcolonial state, and the relationship between citizens and data storage in a socialist state. In a second section, I will examine the question of which measures can lessen the danger of data storage regarding privacy in a democratic society. Lastly, I will discuss how much data-driven governance is required for democracy and political participation. I will present a second case study: digital participatory budgeting (DPB) in Brazil.

Highlights

Technological enthusiasts promote a process of building a global information economy, once characterized by Bill Gates as “friction-free capitalism” (Mosco 2016)
If we examine technological development in our Western capitalistic states, we face two main problems: first, we have to deal with a lack of privacy protection; second, there is a lack of algorithmic transparency and democratic control
It is not about single technological components; it is about the social, political, economic and technical. It is about the role of technology in the complex pattern of society

Summary

Introduction

Technological enthusiasts promote a process of building a global information economy, once characterized by Bill Gates as “friction-free capitalism” (Mosco 2016). Political criticism of data storage grows because of a lack of privacy protection and the centralization of data in the hands of governments and corporations This discussion is common in our society. I suggest that technological development is part of a complex pattern of factors forming our society This human–technological complex will be the main point of discussion. It is necessary to put Big Data and cloud computing in the context of political economy, society, and culture, i.e., the human–technological complex or social–technological complex. Digital participatory budgeting (DPB) is an online space for discussions with society on local budget allocation issues and priorities Such platforms exist both as integral parts of face-to-face participatory budgeting and as exclusively digital experiences (Matheus et al 2010). I will discuss how technological development and political activism can flow in a social–technological system

Definition of the Term Big Data

Findings

How Much Data-Driven Governance Do Democracy and Political Participation Need?

Conclusions