新殖民主义的算法装置:或者,我们能追究“操作图像”的责任吗?

Q3 Arts and Humanities Nordic Journal of Aesthetics Pub Date : 2021-07-02 DOI:10.7146/nja.v30i61-62.127862
A. Downey
{"title":"新殖民主义的算法装置:或者,我们能追究“操作图像”的责任吗?","authors":"A. Downey","doi":"10.7146/nja.v30i61-62.127862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Images made by machines for machines are void of an aesthetic context. They are part of a machine-based operative logic and do not, in the words of Harun Farocki, “portray a process but are themselves part of a process.”1 Defined by the operation in question rather than their referential logic, and following Farocki’s formulation, such images are commonly referred to as “operational images.” Structurally, they are not propagandistic (they do not try to convince), nor are they instructive (they are not interested in directing our attention). They are not, moreover, content-based, inasmuch as they exist as abstract binary code rather than pictograms. Void of anthropological or aesthetic intention, the practical process-based functionality of “operational images” effectively anticipates the obsolescence of “perception” as a human-defined activity. Although “operational images” would seem to be largely understood in negative terms (based as they are on insular and closed procedures), they have a purposiveness that is revealed in their real world impact—the way they are used, for example, in surveillance technologies and in the establishment of autonomous models of warfare. This recursive and yet purposive functioning of “operational images” foreshadows the opaque architecture of “black box” technologies and the artificial intelligence (AI) systems that underwrite contemporary structures of data gathering and aerialbound forms of warfare. Needless to say, the technologies that commandeer and exploit airspace are demonstrably detrimental to those who are subject to their autonomous apparatuses, which raises a crucial question: how do we conceptualize the threat associated with both the opacity of “black box” assemblies and the all-too-real impact of air-bound technologies that, to a large extent, remain beyond the purview and control of the vast majority of the world’s population? THE ALGORITHMIC APPARATUS OF NEO-COLONIALISM: OR, CAN WE HOLD “OPERATIONAL IMAGES” TO ACCOUNT?","PeriodicalId":38858,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Aesthetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Algorithmic Apparatus of Neo-Colonialism: Or, Can We Hold \\\"Operational Images\\\" to Account?\",\"authors\":\"A. Downey\",\"doi\":\"10.7146/nja.v30i61-62.127862\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Images made by machines for machines are void of an aesthetic context. They are part of a machine-based operative logic and do not, in the words of Harun Farocki, “portray a process but are themselves part of a process.”1 Defined by the operation in question rather than their referential logic, and following Farocki’s formulation, such images are commonly referred to as “operational images.” Structurally, they are not propagandistic (they do not try to convince), nor are they instructive (they are not interested in directing our attention). They are not, moreover, content-based, inasmuch as they exist as abstract binary code rather than pictograms. Void of anthropological or aesthetic intention, the practical process-based functionality of “operational images” effectively anticipates the obsolescence of “perception” as a human-defined activity. Although “operational images” would seem to be largely understood in negative terms (based as they are on insular and closed procedures), they have a purposiveness that is revealed in their real world impact—the way they are used, for example, in surveillance technologies and in the establishment of autonomous models of warfare. This recursive and yet purposive functioning of “operational images” foreshadows the opaque architecture of “black box” technologies and the artificial intelligence (AI) systems that underwrite contemporary structures of data gathering and aerialbound forms of warfare. Needless to say, the technologies that commandeer and exploit airspace are demonstrably detrimental to those who are subject to their autonomous apparatuses, which raises a crucial question: how do we conceptualize the threat associated with both the opacity of “black box” assemblies and the all-too-real impact of air-bound technologies that, to a large extent, remain beyond the purview and control of the vast majority of the world’s population? THE ALGORITHMIC APPARATUS OF NEO-COLONIALISM: OR, CAN WE HOLD “OPERATIONAL IMAGES” TO ACCOUNT?\",\"PeriodicalId\":38858,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nordic Journal of Aesthetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nordic Journal of Aesthetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7146/nja.v30i61-62.127862\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Aesthetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nja.v30i61-62.127862","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

机器为机器制作的图像缺乏美学背景。它们是基于机器的操作逻辑的一部分,用Harun Farocki的话来说,并不是“描绘一个过程,而是本身是一个过程的一部分。”,它们不是宣传性的(它们不试图说服),也不是指导性的(他们对引导我们的注意力不感兴趣)。此外,它们并不是基于内容的,因为它们是作为抽象的二进制代码而不是象形图存在的。由于没有人类学或美学意图,“操作图像”基于实践过程的功能有效地预测了“感知”作为人类定义活动的过时。尽管“作战图像”似乎在很大程度上被理解为负面的(因为它们是基于孤立和封闭的程序),但它们的目的性在其现实世界的影响中得到了体现——例如,它们在监视技术和建立自主战争模型中的使用方式。“作战图像”的这种递归但有目的的功能预示着“黑匣子”技术和人工智能(AI)系统的不透明架构,这些技术和系统为当代数据收集和空中作战形式提供了保障。不用说,征用和利用空域的技术显然对那些受制于自主设备的人有害,这就提出了一个关键问题:我们如何概念化与“黑匣子”组件的不透明性和空中技术的真实影响相关的威胁,在很大程度上,仍然超出世界绝大多数人口的权限和控制?新殖民主义的算法装置:或者,我们能追究“操作图像”的责任吗?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Algorithmic Apparatus of Neo-Colonialism: Or, Can We Hold "Operational Images" to Account?
Images made by machines for machines are void of an aesthetic context. They are part of a machine-based operative logic and do not, in the words of Harun Farocki, “portray a process but are themselves part of a process.”1 Defined by the operation in question rather than their referential logic, and following Farocki’s formulation, such images are commonly referred to as “operational images.” Structurally, they are not propagandistic (they do not try to convince), nor are they instructive (they are not interested in directing our attention). They are not, moreover, content-based, inasmuch as they exist as abstract binary code rather than pictograms. Void of anthropological or aesthetic intention, the practical process-based functionality of “operational images” effectively anticipates the obsolescence of “perception” as a human-defined activity. Although “operational images” would seem to be largely understood in negative terms (based as they are on insular and closed procedures), they have a purposiveness that is revealed in their real world impact—the way they are used, for example, in surveillance technologies and in the establishment of autonomous models of warfare. This recursive and yet purposive functioning of “operational images” foreshadows the opaque architecture of “black box” technologies and the artificial intelligence (AI) systems that underwrite contemporary structures of data gathering and aerialbound forms of warfare. Needless to say, the technologies that commandeer and exploit airspace are demonstrably detrimental to those who are subject to their autonomous apparatuses, which raises a crucial question: how do we conceptualize the threat associated with both the opacity of “black box” assemblies and the all-too-real impact of air-bound technologies that, to a large extent, remain beyond the purview and control of the vast majority of the world’s population? THE ALGORITHMIC APPARATUS OF NEO-COLONIALISM: OR, CAN WE HOLD “OPERATIONAL IMAGES” TO ACCOUNT?
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nordic Journal of Aesthetics
Nordic Journal of Aesthetics Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Your Tongue Here (Or Not): On Imagining Whether To Take a Bite (Or Not) Stay with Me: Uncertain Indices and Attentional Presence in Chat Interfaces Kant's "Aesthetic Idea": Towards an Aesthetics of Non-Attention Nothing to See? Paying Attention in the Dark Environment Attention, Affect, and Aesthetic Experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1