{"title":"与算法共存:哥斯达黎加的机构和用户文化》,作者 Ignacio Siles(评论)","authors":"Mónica Humeres","doi":"10.1353/tech.2024.a926325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica</em> by Ignacio Siles <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Mónica Humeres (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica</em> By Ignacio Siles. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2023. Pp. 234. <p>What does it mean for people in a Latin American country to live in a datafied society? Bearing this question in mind, Ignacio Siles devoted five years to empirically study how people make sense of algorithms in Costa Rica, focusing on the use of three platforms: Netflix, Spotify, and TikTok. In this book, situated at the intersection of classic communication studies, human-machine communication studies, and the history of digital cultures, Siles demonstrates how individuals interact within a logic of \"mutual domestication.\" Considering that algorithms are designed to gather information and platforms have the specific purpose of keeping users engaged, his research strives to show how users, far from being passive victims, also use these technologies for their own purposes.</p> <p>While the theoretical arguments against technological determinism that inspire this study (ch. 1) may not surprise historians of technology, the subsequent subjects at hand developed in the following chapters, will indeed be of inspiration as the empirical discussion illustrates how users can transform algorithmic agency, changing the direction and form in which technology operates, while it also intervenes in their cultural practices. The five dynamics of domestication, which give titles to chapters two through six, are conceptualized as personalization, integration, rituals, conversion, and resistance. They shed light on the specific ways in which individuals comprehend and interact with the algorithms of these platforms.</p> <p>Although the study is firmly rooted in Costa Rica's reality, it has relevance beyond this particular national context. While an increasing number of scholars recognize that the role of technology in social change cannot be assessed independently of its context of interpretation and use, most research continues to prioritize the history <em>of</em> algorithmic development. Thus, Siles's book can be seen as a complement to works like J. L. Chabert and E. Barbin's <em>A History of Algorithms</em> (1999) or E. Finn's <em>What Algorithms Want</em> (2017), contributing to the understanding of the complex relationships between algorithmic production, circulation, and consumption.</p> <p>Notably, Siles makes us consider that the appropriation of algorithms is built on the depths of the desire for connection, closeness, and two-sided communication. A wide range of illustrated cases leads us to think that users feel that the close relationship of mutual recognition between content creators and audiences, historically disrupted by mass media technology, is now being reassembled by these new algorithmic mediations. As J. Edwards-Bello graphically wrote in <em>La chica del Crillón</em> (1935): \"If you had seen the Municipal Theater in those days. The audience had importance back then, and we could see the actresses in the street. We knew them, and they knew us <strong>[End Page 683]</strong> too. Now, on the other hand! The cinema!\". With that same fervent desire for closeness and reciprocity, this book presents stories of user satisfaction when they feel that their everyday algorithm knows them well and acts accordingly.</p> <p>Interestingly, this book reveals that users report that the feeling of being recognized by the algorithm, far from being a programmed quality of technology, is achieved through active shaping. In this regard, the book offers myriad fascinating cases in which users take care of their algorithms. There are, for instance, testimonials about how by sharing content from TikTok, users report training their algorithm to return a broader repertoire; or how for users, clicking on content recommended by Netflix is a message of gratitude to their machine; or how even Spotify is a technology for managing individual and collective moods. Hence, the fact that individuals act through algorithms means that they are themselves part of algorithmic mediation. This, however, should not be confused with an uncritical acceptance by users, since the rejection of some rules, the strategies to deal with them, and the awareness of the power that algorithms exert give life to a whole chapter (ch. 6).</p> <p>One question that arises is whether the temporal dimension of the fieldwork, begun before and concluded during the COVID-19 confinement, could have been considered both in the analysis...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":49446,"journal":{"name":"Technology and Culture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica by Ignacio Siles (review)\",\"authors\":\"Mónica Humeres\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/tech.2024.a926325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica</em> by Ignacio Siles <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Mónica Humeres (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica</em> By Ignacio Siles. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2023. Pp. 234. <p>What does it mean for people in a Latin American country to live in a datafied society? Bearing this question in mind, Ignacio Siles devoted five years to empirically study how people make sense of algorithms in Costa Rica, focusing on the use of three platforms: Netflix, Spotify, and TikTok. In this book, situated at the intersection of classic communication studies, human-machine communication studies, and the history of digital cultures, Siles demonstrates how individuals interact within a logic of \\\"mutual domestication.\\\" Considering that algorithms are designed to gather information and platforms have the specific purpose of keeping users engaged, his research strives to show how users, far from being passive victims, also use these technologies for their own purposes.</p> <p>While the theoretical arguments against technological determinism that inspire this study (ch. 1) may not surprise historians of technology, the subsequent subjects at hand developed in the following chapters, will indeed be of inspiration as the empirical discussion illustrates how users can transform algorithmic agency, changing the direction and form in which technology operates, while it also intervenes in their cultural practices. The five dynamics of domestication, which give titles to chapters two through six, are conceptualized as personalization, integration, rituals, conversion, and resistance. They shed light on the specific ways in which individuals comprehend and interact with the algorithms of these platforms.</p> <p>Although the study is firmly rooted in Costa Rica's reality, it has relevance beyond this particular national context. While an increasing number of scholars recognize that the role of technology in social change cannot be assessed independently of its context of interpretation and use, most research continues to prioritize the history <em>of</em> algorithmic development. Thus, Siles's book can be seen as a complement to works like J. L. Chabert and E. Barbin's <em>A History of Algorithms</em> (1999) or E. Finn's <em>What Algorithms Want</em> (2017), contributing to the understanding of the complex relationships between algorithmic production, circulation, and consumption.</p> <p>Notably, Siles makes us consider that the appropriation of algorithms is built on the depths of the desire for connection, closeness, and two-sided communication. A wide range of illustrated cases leads us to think that users feel that the close relationship of mutual recognition between content creators and audiences, historically disrupted by mass media technology, is now being reassembled by these new algorithmic mediations. As J. Edwards-Bello graphically wrote in <em>La chica del Crillón</em> (1935): \\\"If you had seen the Municipal Theater in those days. The audience had importance back then, and we could see the actresses in the street. We knew them, and they knew us <strong>[End Page 683]</strong> too. Now, on the other hand! The cinema!\\\". With that same fervent desire for closeness and reciprocity, this book presents stories of user satisfaction when they feel that their everyday algorithm knows them well and acts accordingly.</p> <p>Interestingly, this book reveals that users report that the feeling of being recognized by the algorithm, far from being a programmed quality of technology, is achieved through active shaping. In this regard, the book offers myriad fascinating cases in which users take care of their algorithms. There are, for instance, testimonials about how by sharing content from TikTok, users report training their algorithm to return a broader repertoire; or how for users, clicking on content recommended by Netflix is a message of gratitude to their machine; or how even Spotify is a technology for managing individual and collective moods. Hence, the fact that individuals act through algorithms means that they are themselves part of algorithmic mediation. This, however, should not be confused with an uncritical acceptance by users, since the rejection of some rules, the strategies to deal with them, and the awareness of the power that algorithms exert give life to a whole chapter (ch. 6).</p> <p>One question that arises is whether the temporal dimension of the fieldwork, begun before and concluded during the COVID-19 confinement, could have been considered both in the analysis...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technology and Culture\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technology and Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2024.a926325\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2024.a926325","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
评论者 与算法共存:Ignacio Siles 著 Mónica Humeres (bio) Living with Algorithms:哥斯达黎加的机构和用户文化 作者:Ignacio Siles。马萨诸塞州剑桥市:麻省理工学院出版社,2023 年。第 234 页。对于一个拉丁美洲国家的人们来说,生活在一个数据化的社会中意味着什么?带着这个问题,伊格纳西奥-西莱斯花了五年时间,以三个平台的使用为重点,实证研究了哥斯达黎加人如何理解算法:Netflix、Spotify 和 TikTok。在这本书中,西里斯在经典传播研究、人机传播研究和数字文化史的交叉点上,展示了个人如何在 "相互驯化 "的逻辑中互动。考虑到算法的设计目的是收集信息,而平台的特定目的是让用户参与其中,他的研究力图展示用户如何非但不是被动的受害者,还利用这些技术达到自己的目的。尽管本研究(第 1 章)所依据的反对技术决定论的理论论据可能不会让技术史学家感到惊讶,但接下来各章中的研究课题确实会给他们带来启发,因为实证讨论说明了用户如何转变算法代理,改变技术运作的方向和形式,同时也干预他们的文化实践。驯化的五种动力是第二章至第六章的标题,它们被概念化为个性化、整合、仪式、转换和抵抗。它们揭示了个人理解这些平台的算法并与之互动的具体方式。虽然这项研究牢牢扎根于哥斯达黎加的现实,但其现实意义却超越了这一特定的国家背景。虽然越来越多的学者认识到,评估技术在社会变革中的作用不能脱离其解释和使用的背景,但大多数研究仍然优先考虑算法发展的历史。因此,西尔斯的这本书可以看作是对 J. L. Chabert 和 E. Barbin 的《算法史》(A History of Algorithms,1999 年)或 E. Finn 的《算法想要什么》(What Algorithms Want,2017 年)等著作的补充,有助于理解算法生产、流通和消费之间的复杂关系。值得注意的是,西尔斯让我们思考到,对算法的占有是建立在对联系、亲近和双向交流的深度渴望之上的。大量图文并茂的案例让我们想到,用户认为内容创作者与受众之间相互认可的密切关系在历史上曾被大众传媒技术所破坏,而现在这些新的算法媒介正在重新组合这种关系。正如爱德华兹-贝洛(J. Edwards-Bello)在《La chica del Crillón》(1935 年)一书中形象地写道:"如果你看过当年的市立剧院。那时的观众很重要,我们可以在街上看到女演员。我们认识她们,她们也认识我们。反观现在!电影院!"。带着对亲近和互惠的热切渴望,本书讲述了当用户感到日常算法非常了解他们并采取相应行动时,他们感到满意的故事。有趣的是,本书揭示出,用户报告说,被算法认可的感觉远非技术的程序品质,而是通过主动塑造实现的。在这方面,书中提供了无数用户照顾算法的精彩案例。例如,书中提供了用户如何通过分享 TikTok 上的内容来训练算法,使其返回更多的内容;或者,对用户来说,点击 Netflix 推荐的内容就是向机器表达感激之情;甚至 Spotify 也是一种管理个人和集体情绪的技术。因此,个人通过算法采取行动这一事实意味着,他们本身就是算法中介的一部分。然而,这不应与用户不加批判地接受混为一谈,因为对某些规则的拒绝、应对这些规则的策略以及对算法所发挥的力量的认识赋予了整整一章的生命(第 6 章)。出现的一个问题是,在 COVID-19 禁闭之前开始并在禁闭期间结束的实地调查的时间维度,是否可以在分析中得到考虑?
Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica by Ignacio Siles (review)
Reviewed by:
Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica by Ignacio Siles
Mónica Humeres (bio)
Living with Algorithms: Agency and User Culture in Costa Rica By Ignacio Siles. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2023. Pp. 234.
What does it mean for people in a Latin American country to live in a datafied society? Bearing this question in mind, Ignacio Siles devoted five years to empirically study how people make sense of algorithms in Costa Rica, focusing on the use of three platforms: Netflix, Spotify, and TikTok. In this book, situated at the intersection of classic communication studies, human-machine communication studies, and the history of digital cultures, Siles demonstrates how individuals interact within a logic of "mutual domestication." Considering that algorithms are designed to gather information and platforms have the specific purpose of keeping users engaged, his research strives to show how users, far from being passive victims, also use these technologies for their own purposes.
While the theoretical arguments against technological determinism that inspire this study (ch. 1) may not surprise historians of technology, the subsequent subjects at hand developed in the following chapters, will indeed be of inspiration as the empirical discussion illustrates how users can transform algorithmic agency, changing the direction and form in which technology operates, while it also intervenes in their cultural practices. The five dynamics of domestication, which give titles to chapters two through six, are conceptualized as personalization, integration, rituals, conversion, and resistance. They shed light on the specific ways in which individuals comprehend and interact with the algorithms of these platforms.
Although the study is firmly rooted in Costa Rica's reality, it has relevance beyond this particular national context. While an increasing number of scholars recognize that the role of technology in social change cannot be assessed independently of its context of interpretation and use, most research continues to prioritize the history of algorithmic development. Thus, Siles's book can be seen as a complement to works like J. L. Chabert and E. Barbin's A History of Algorithms (1999) or E. Finn's What Algorithms Want (2017), contributing to the understanding of the complex relationships between algorithmic production, circulation, and consumption.
Notably, Siles makes us consider that the appropriation of algorithms is built on the depths of the desire for connection, closeness, and two-sided communication. A wide range of illustrated cases leads us to think that users feel that the close relationship of mutual recognition between content creators and audiences, historically disrupted by mass media technology, is now being reassembled by these new algorithmic mediations. As J. Edwards-Bello graphically wrote in La chica del Crillón (1935): "If you had seen the Municipal Theater in those days. The audience had importance back then, and we could see the actresses in the street. We knew them, and they knew us [End Page 683] too. Now, on the other hand! The cinema!". With that same fervent desire for closeness and reciprocity, this book presents stories of user satisfaction when they feel that their everyday algorithm knows them well and acts accordingly.
Interestingly, this book reveals that users report that the feeling of being recognized by the algorithm, far from being a programmed quality of technology, is achieved through active shaping. In this regard, the book offers myriad fascinating cases in which users take care of their algorithms. There are, for instance, testimonials about how by sharing content from TikTok, users report training their algorithm to return a broader repertoire; or how for users, clicking on content recommended by Netflix is a message of gratitude to their machine; or how even Spotify is a technology for managing individual and collective moods. Hence, the fact that individuals act through algorithms means that they are themselves part of algorithmic mediation. This, however, should not be confused with an uncritical acceptance by users, since the rejection of some rules, the strategies to deal with them, and the awareness of the power that algorithms exert give life to a whole chapter (ch. 6).
One question that arises is whether the temporal dimension of the fieldwork, begun before and concluded during the COVID-19 confinement, could have been considered both in the analysis...
期刊介绍:
Technology and Culture, the preeminent journal of the history of technology, draws on scholarship in diverse disciplines to publish insightful pieces intended for general readers as well as specialists. Subscribers include scientists, engineers, anthropologists, sociologists, economists, museum curators, archivists, scholars, librarians, educators, historians, and many others. In addition to scholarly essays, each issue features 30-40 book reviews and reviews of new museum exhibitions. To illuminate important debates and draw attention to specific topics, the journal occasionally publishes thematic issues. Technology and Culture is the official journal of the Society for the History of Technology (SHOT).