Interface and Data Biopolitics in the Age of Hyperconnectivity: Abstract and A Hymn

Table of Links

Abstract and 1. A Hymn

2. Asymmetry

3. Bubbles, Guinea Pigs

4. Interface and Data Biopolitics

5. Conclusions: Implications for Design and References

Abstract

This article describes their biopolitical implications for design from psychological, cultural, legal, functional and aesthetic/perceptive ways, in the framework of Hyperconnectivity: the condition according to which person-to-person, person-to-machine and machine-to-machine communication progressively shift to networked and digital means.

A definition is given for the terms of "interface biopolitics" and "data biopolitics", as well as evidence supporting these definitions and a description of the technological, theoretical and practice-based innovations bringing them into meaningful existence.

Interfaces, algorithms, artificial intelligences of various types, the tendency in quantified self and the concept of "information bubbles" will be examined in terms of interface and data biopolitics, from the point of view of design, and for their implications in terms of freedoms, transparency, justice and accessibility to human rights.

A working hypothesis is described for technologically relevant design practices and education processes, in order to confront with these issues in critical, ethical and inclusive ways.

Keywords: Hyperconnectivity, Algorithms, Biopolitics, Ethics, Data

1. A Hymn

In her “Hymn of Acxiom” folk singer Vienna Teng (2013) starts off with lyrics “Somebody hears you, you know that…”, in what seems to be a church choir. After listening for a bit, the real topic the artist is discussing about becomes clear: Acxiom is not a benevolent divinity somewhere in the cosmosphere caringly waiting to hear the troubles of his beloved human beings, but, rather, a highpowered data broker which has been described as “the Private NSA” (Tom’s Guide, 2013), as the silent, largest consumer data processor in the world (Fortune Magazine, 2004) and as “Big Brother in Arkansas” (NY Times, 2012). The topic of the song is data-surveillance. The idea for the song came while the author was pursuing an MBA at the University of Michigan: a colleague working with Acxiom data was shocked about the amount of information the company had available about herself and her husband. An interesting thing about the song is that the creepy, Orwellian, lyrics also empathize with databases as well as excoriating them.

This is, in fact, an interesting point of view. As, on the one hand, we – directly and indirectly – consent tour data to be collected through our behaviors and basically accepting our lifestyle, on the other hand we feel deeply uneasy about that and from its implications. As we benefit from enterprises being able to provide us with products and services which are “more relevant” for us (more on this later in the article), we are simultaneously wary of the fact that a single subject knows so much about us and uses it to “sell us” to the highest bidder, and what this possibility implies for our liberties, freedoms and rights. Even more, it is progressively harder, if not impossible, for us, to know and understand what parts of our online and offline environment are determined from these data collection processes, or about which subjects have this data about us available, or how they are using it and for what purposes (Lafrance, 2014).

In fact, the entries we see when we browse search engines, social media websites, and other online services are completely determined by these processes: the operators of these services feed the data they acquired about us to their classification algorithms which, in return, use it to determine what we may be more and less interested about, or where their optimal business opportunities lay in relation to our profile.

This is not only true for our online lives: the offline world is quickly catching up. Physical mailings; fidelity cards; algorithmic research and control applied to stores, services and spaces of the city; imaging through security cameras; object and facial recognition on devices and architectures; the Internet of Things (IoT) and its sensors, possibilities for user identification and biometrics. These all combine with a plethora of other options which are turning us into data subjects, which can be recognized and tracked on databases as in the physical world.