La noción de «política» presupone un Estado o aparato degobierno que impone su voluntad a los demás. La «política» es la negación de lo político; la política está al serviciode alguna forma de élite, que afirma conocer mejor quelos demás como deben manejarse los asuntos públicos

Almenos, cabe esperar que un profesor abiertamente anarquista cuestione cómo funcionan las universidades —no me refiero aquí a solicitar un departamento de estudios anarquistas —

Absent this question, A/B testing reproduces structural inequality through several mechanism

A is the “best” option for user experience? In this case, what is best for the majority of current site visitors (set the default to White) produces an unequal experience, with the ever-so-slightly more time-consuming experience (additional clicks) reserved for PoC, who may also experience a microaggression in the process. Although our hypothetical “default to white” race/ethnicity dropdown is rarely implemented because of widespread sensitivity to such a blunt reminder of ongoing racial disparity, the same underlying principle is constantly used to develop and refine UX, UI, and other elements of sociotechnical systems.

their gender, race, age, class, and so on are not specified. If we shift to an intersectional framework, one of the implications is that we must restructure testing at all stages, from early prototypes through quality control in mass production, around what Algorithmic Justice League founder Joy Buolamwini has described as intersectional benchmarks

wever, in practice this approach also leads to the reproduction and reification of existing social categories through algorithmic surveillance, tracking users across sites, gathering and selling their data, and the development of filter bubbles (only showing users content that we believe they are comfortable with).

Buolamwini is best known for demonstrating that facial analysis software performs worst on women with darker skin tones, but also advocates for greatly increased regulation and oversight of facial analysis tools, against their use by military or law enforcement, and fights to limit their use against marginalized people across areas as diverse as hiring, housing, and health care.9

n manufacturing and in science, so in design: an intersectional critique of the ways that current design practices systematically reproduce the matrix of domination ultimately requires not only more diverse design teams, community accountability, and control, as we will explore in chapter 2, but also a retooling of the methods that shape so many design domains under the current universalist paradigm.

onsider an algorithm for university admissions. An (individualized) algorithmic fairness approach attempts to ensure that any two individuals with the same profile, but who differ only by, say, gender, receive the same recommendation (admit/waitlist/decline). Auditing an admissions algorithm under the assumptions of algorithmic fairness can be conducted through paired-test audits: submit a group of paired, identical applications, but change only the gender of one of the applicants in each pair and observe whether the system produces the same recommendation for each. If the algorithm recommends admission for more men than women (at a statistically significant level) in otherwise identical paired applications, we can say that it is biased against women. It needs to be retrained and reaudited to ensure that this bias is eliminated. This is the approach proposed by most of the researchers and practitioners working on algorithmic bias today

Now, imagine auditing the same admissions algorithm, but under the assumptions of algorithmic justice. This approach is concerned not only with individualized symmetrical treatment, but also with the individual and group-level effects of historical and ongoing oppression and injustice within the matrix of domination, as well as how to ultimately produce a more just distribution of benefits, opportunities, and harms across all groups of people. In our example, this means that the algorithm designers must discuss, debate, and decide upon what they believe to be a just distribution of outcomes.

algorithmic

The point is not that it's wrong to privilege some users over others; the point is that these decisions need to be made explicit

Con respecto a los escenarios delineados hasta aquí, ¿cuál es la posición y el papelde las DH? ¿nuestro campo ha modificado o ha contestado a los desequilibrios que hemosdescrito? Si dirigimos la vista a las infraestructuras y a los recursos que hoy constituyeny hacen posible nuestra vida digital (y también la física), descubriremos que estos existengracias a una estructura de comunicación y control (redes, cables, plataformas, centros dedatos) en manos de pocas multinacionales, principalmente radicadas en los EstadosUnido

the dichotomous nature of many of the debates over the future of the book (i.e., print vs. digital) can be traced back to a much larger struggle related to power structures and to who controls (new) knowledge and communication systems within academia.

debían estarprotagonizados por extranjeros y tratar de cosas con las que no podía identificarme. Puesbien, la situación cambió cuando descubrí los libros africanos.No había muchos disponibles, y no eran tan fáciles de encontrar como los extranjeros.Pero gracias a escritores como Chinua Achebe y Camara Laye, mi percepción de laliteratura cambió. Comprendí que en la literatura también podía existir gente como yo,chicas con la piel de color chocolate cuyo pelo rizado no caía en colas de caballo.Empecé a escribir sobre asuntos que reconocía.5

Como explica Foucault (1970), cadasociedad acoge discursos quehace funcionar como verdaderoslos cuales están ligados circularmente a los sistemas de poder que los producen y mantienen así como a los efectos de poder que induceny que la acompañan. Un régimen de verdades una condición de formación yde desarrollo de un sistema social, no es simplemente ideológico o superestructural.

Vol. 5 Núm. 5 (2022): Enero - Junio

Línea de Investigación:Comunicación, Cultura y Poder

11 Tuyos, oh Señor, son la grandeza, el poder, la gloria, la victoria y la majestad. Todo lo que hay en los cielos y en la tierra es tuyo, oh Señor, y este es tu reino. Te adoramos como el que está por sobre todas las cosas. 1 Crónicas 29:11

es decir, formas difusas y casi microbianas e intermitentes de poder.

a relación entre el diseño, la cultura y el poder en la coyuntura actual. En retrospectiva la coyuntura fue definida en términos de la ocupación ontológica de mundos relacionales por un mundo dominante, por un lado, y por las limitaciones de la teoría social moderna y las ciencias modernas para proporcionar soluciones convincentes a los problemas perversos o más difíciles de asir actuales, por el otro. Como he mostrado es posible encontrar elementos para responder a estos desafíos en varias tendencias académicas, incluyendo la antropología, el desarrollo, el humanitarismo, la ecología y ontología política y las teorías feministas. También es posible encontrar apoyo conceptual y político para esta tarea en las luchas y el pensamiento de grupos en resistencia a la globalización neoliberal, especialmente aquellos cuyas luchas emergen de ontologías relacionales, como en el caso de los grupos indígenas y afrodescendientes mencionados br

inHabboHotelcontrolismodulatedwherenewactionsareconstantlybeingincorporated,aninventivepowerthatisworkingbyinclusion,asFoucaultillustrated,and‘whoseeffectwillbegreaterthanthesumofitscomponentparts’,asDeleuzeargued.

Ratherthanaself-regulatingcommunityaspromotedbytheowners,theresearchersconcludethatthesiteadvancesanimaginaryofthe‘modelcitizen’builtonexpectationsthatsubjectsinternalizerulesbyengaginginself-surveillanceandself-policing,andwhentheseself-regulatorymechanismsfail,subjectsaredisciplinedbymoderators(e.g.,sanctioned,expelled,orbanned)

Thespacesthatsovereignpowerproducescorrespondtosuchstrategiesandtechnologiesofexclusion:expulsion,prohibition,banishment,eviction,exile,anddeportationaresuchexamples.Bycontrast,beingasubjectofpowermobilizesstrategiesandtechnologiesofdiscipline,whichrequiresubmissionbutopenuppossibilitiesofsubversion.Thespacesthatdisciplinarypowerproducesareappropriatetosuchstrategiesandtechnologiesofdiscipline:asylums,camps,andbarracksbutalsohospitals,prisons,schools,andmuseumsasspacesofconfinement.Eachofthesespacesisaspaceofcontestation,competitiveandsocialstrugglesinandthroughwhichcertainformsofknowledgeareproducedinenunciationsthatperformsubjects.Neitherspacesofexclusionnorspacesofdisciplinearestaticorcontainerspaces.Theyaredynamicandrelationalspaces.Thereareno‘physical’spacesseparatefrompowerrelationsandnopowerrelationsthatarenotembeddedinspatializingstrategiesandtechnologiesofpower.

Ifthecomputerizationofsocietyraisessuchquestions,theanalysisoftheproduction,dissemination,andlegitimationofknowledge,onwhichithasaprofoundeffect,cannotberestrictedtounderstandingcomputerizationascommunicationorcomputer-mediatedcommunication.Rather,theobjectofinvestigationoughttobelanguagegamesthatbecamepossiblethroughwhatLyotardsawasnetworkedcomputers

WhatwefindinLyotard—albeitinincipientform—isthatratherthanconceivingaseparateandindependentspace,thepointistorecognizethatpowerrelationsincontemporarysocietiesarebeingincreasinglymediatedandconstitutedthroughcomputernetworksthateventuallycametobeknownastheInternet.

WehavealreadycharacterizedcyberspaceasaspaceofrelationsbetweenandamongbodiesactingthroughtheInternet.Wenotedearlierthat1984wasthebirthoftheconceptofcyberspace.Yetduringtheverysameyear,amuchlessknownwork,orrather,aworkknownmuchmoreforitstitle,Jean-FrançoisLyotard’sThePostmodernCondition(1984),appeared.

TheanathemaforLessigisthelossofthisfreedomincyberspace.Inrealspace,governingpeoplerequiresinducingthemtoactincertainways,butinthelastinstance,peoplehadthechoicetoactthiswayorthatway.Bycontrast,incyberspaceconductisgovernedbycode,whichtakesawaythatchoice.Incyberspace,‘iftheregulatorwantstoinduceacertainbehavior,sheneednotthreaten,orcajole,toinspirethechange.Sheneedonlychangethecode—thesoftwarethatdefinesthetermsuponwhichtheindividualgainsaccesstothesystem,orusesassetsonthesystem.’[37]Thisisbecause‘codeisanefficientmeansofregulation.Butitsperfectionmakesitsomethingdifferent.Oneobeystheselawsascodenotbecauseoneshould;oneobeystheselawsascodebecauseonecandonothingelse.Thereisnochoiceaboutwhethertoyieldtothedemandforapassword;onecompliesifonewantstoenterthesystem.Inthewellimplementedsystem,thereisnocivildisobedience.’[38]WhatLessigsuggestsisthatcyberspaceisnotonlyseparateandindependentbutconstitutesanewmodeofpower.Youconstituteyourselfasasubjectofpowerbysubmittingtocode.

Butthesearenotpureforms;rather,thecitizensubjectembodiestheseaspotentialities.Beingasubjecttopowerismarkedbythecitizen’sdominationbythesovereign,andherrightsderivefromthatwhichisgiventoherbythe(patriarchal)sovereign.Beingasubjectofpowermeansbeinganagentofpower,evenifthisrequiressubmission.

asubjectisacompositeofmultipleforces,identifications,affiliations,andassociations.Thesubjectisdividedbytheseelementsratherthanbytraditionandmodernity.Italsoassertsthatasubjectisasiteofmultipleformsofpower(sovereign,disciplinary,control)thatembodiescompositedispositions(obedience,submission,subversion).