In this paper the author highlights how both engineers and social scientists misinterpret the relationship between technology and society. In particular he attacks the narrative, widespread among engineers, that technological artifacts, such as software, have no political properties in themselves and that function or efficiency are the only drivers of technological design and implementation.

  • Lumisal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Well, I don’t think you can “make something political”, everything that exists can be perceived and analyzed from different perspectives, one of which is its impact on the society, which is a political viewpoint.

    Hence, you are making it political. Like you yourself said, politics in itself a construct, not a natural force.

    The problem with taking the “everything is political” approach to things in life is that, much like physical reality, you end up diluting the impact something has.

    If you spend energy is on making things that were not intended to be political and don’t bring significant harm by existing, you detract from things that were intentionally created to be political and do bring harm.

    Instead of say debating if a browser has gendered pronouns that time was used protesting against bigots who went to actually remove gender rights, the world would be a better place. Because time is finite, and few have the patience of philosophers to ponder rhetorical orbs.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Hence, you are making it political. Like you yourself said, politics in itself a construct, not a natural force.

      Wherever something is or isn’t political is decided by the society, all I can do is point out potential issues, but that is not “making it political”, just like pointing to something that is dead, doesn’t suddenly makes it die. No it was dead before.

      • Lumisal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Ah but see, politics much like the idea of death itself is still just philosophy. For some humans, the perishing of the body isn’t necessarily death either. Disagreement can be found where it can be made

        • cmhe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Exactly.

          All I can point out that I don’t see the a body moving, not breathing, no pulse and not reacting to external stimuli, all facts, but wherever or not this state is called “dead”, I can decide for myself, and groups of people will have a final say on. Other groups might disagree, politics might be involved, maybe the issue will be settled, maybe not. I, as an individual cannot say how the outcome will be.