Abstract

AbstractIn his book Tools for Conviviality (1975), Ivan Illich calls for human self-limitation in technology development. His aim is neither environmental protection nor the prevention of unforeseen side-effects of technology development, but the comprehensibility of technologies’ operating principles for the user. For if the construction or repairing of tools requires expert knowledge inaccessible to the public, this necessarily entails social imbalances in power. In a similar manner, Bernard Stiegler conceives the delegation of know-how to technological systems as a kind of proletarianization that ultimately may result in a loss of savoir-vivre. Without sweepingly rejecting the division of labour, automation or specialized knowledge, practices of commoning respond to such diagnoses: free software like GNU/Linux or open hardware largely succeed in unlinking the expert knowledge that advanced computing doubtlessly requires from problematic power effects. From this perspective, proprietary algorithms are problematic, as their lack of transparency prevents conviviality. This also holds for the practices of data aggregation and extraction which steadily increase the information gap between platform providers and users. An even more fundamental problem is posed by so-called “self-learning”, i.e., recursively adapting, algorithms: it is not clear how and to what extent the knowledge and instructions generated by “artificial intelligence” can be traced and reconstructed by human insight. Thus, we are confronted with a situation of potentially non-recoverable proletarianization and non-conviviality that exposes a renewed urgency of Illich’s considerations concerning technological self-limitation.

Highlights

  • In his book Tools for Conviviality (1975), Ivan Illich calls for human self-limitation in technology development

  • Bernard Stiegler, in his critique of political economy, conceives the delegation of know-how to technological systems as a kind of proletarianization that may result in a loss of savoir-vivre

  • Without sweepingly rejecting the division of labour, automation or specialized knowledge, practices of commoning provide a way of responding to such diagnoses: free software like GNU/Linux or open hardware largely succeeds in unlinking the expert knowledge that advanced computing doubtlessly requires from problematic power effects

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In his book Tools for Conviviality (1975), Ivan Illich calls for human self-limitation in technology development. Without sweepingly rejecting the division of labour, automation or specialized knowledge, practices of commoning provide a way of responding to such diagnoses: free software like GNU/Linux or open hardware largely succeeds in unlinking the expert knowledge that advanced computing doubtlessly requires from problematic power effects (cf Benkler). From this perspective, proprietary algorithms are problematic, as their lack of transparency prevents conviviality. I will apply these considerations to the societal impact of opaque algorithms

Conviviality and technological self-limitation
Illich’s call for self-limitation in technology development
Tools for conviviality
Stiegler on commerce and proletarianization
Media technologies as tools for conviviality?
Algorithms and opacity
Findings
Conviviality and AI?
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.