Exploring algorithmic reputation and governance. replabs.xyz
Exploring algorithmic reputation and governance. replabs.xyz

Subscribe to Oliver Klingefjord

Subscribe to Oliver Klingefjord
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
II'm a supporter of RadicalXChange and their mission of exploring new ways of structuring society. The concepts within the organization are usually well-thought-out and solid. But one idea seems very off for me:
The reasoning behind this idea is roughly:
The fourth industrial revolution will render many jobs obsolete.
Data is extremely valuable but produced by big-tech users for free.
People derive a large degree of their sense of self-worth through their labor.
Thus, a way to smoothen the transition into the post-industrial era is to consider the work that goes into producing data “labor”.
1 and 2 are indisputable to anyone paying attention. I think 3 is partially true – people do derive a lot of self-worth through contributing. But people can contribute in many ways, and the notion that contribution equals labor is a laggard notion from the capitalist paradigm rather than a universal axiom. Therefore, trying to glorify these “data bullshit jobs” is a really bad idea.
Let's take a step back.
Data is currently the world's most valuable asset and the main source of power in the Information Age. The power asymmetry we see between big tech and its users maps well to the power asymmetries fueling the labor movements in the 19th century. Thus, many organizations, including RadicalXChange, champion the idea of data unions mimicking traditional labor unions.
Data unions are a way for users of big tech platforms to organize and exercise the power that their data is worth. In the same way that labor unions went on strike when their wages were too low, a data union could collectively decide to stop sharing their data with Facebook following some undesirable change to their ranking algorithm.
However, RadicalXChange does not only lobby for data unions and the labor metaphor on the basis of power – they also think it's a way to achieve meaning and dignity. In the capitalist paradigm, your worth as a human is derived from your output as a producer. According to this logic, the only way to live a dignified life when no longer working is to consider mindless browsing "working".

Most of the data you emit while browsing the web is used to target you with ads to sell you things you don’t need. If browsing is a job, it is a meaningless bullshit job. David Graeber has written about how bullshit jobs paired with a work ethic that associates output with self-worth is already causing massive psychological harm. Introducing a whole new class of meaningless “data bullshit jobs” will not make things better.
RadicalXChange recognizes that something has to happen for people to find meaning in the post-industrial era. However, instead of endorsing new ideologies, they try to port the capitalistic idea of your worth being defined by your output, and in doing so, perpetuate the problems caused by the attention economy.
In order to move forward, we need to move beyond our self-worth being defined by our output entirely – otherwise we're all doomed once AGI arrives.
Like this article? Consider buying me a coffee ☕️
II'm a supporter of RadicalXChange and their mission of exploring new ways of structuring society. The concepts within the organization are usually well-thought-out and solid. But one idea seems very off for me:
The reasoning behind this idea is roughly:
The fourth industrial revolution will render many jobs obsolete.
Data is extremely valuable but produced by big-tech users for free.
People derive a large degree of their sense of self-worth through their labor.
Thus, a way to smoothen the transition into the post-industrial era is to consider the work that goes into producing data “labor”.
1 and 2 are indisputable to anyone paying attention. I think 3 is partially true – people do derive a lot of self-worth through contributing. But people can contribute in many ways, and the notion that contribution equals labor is a laggard notion from the capitalist paradigm rather than a universal axiom. Therefore, trying to glorify these “data bullshit jobs” is a really bad idea.
Let's take a step back.
Data is currently the world's most valuable asset and the main source of power in the Information Age. The power asymmetry we see between big tech and its users maps well to the power asymmetries fueling the labor movements in the 19th century. Thus, many organizations, including RadicalXChange, champion the idea of data unions mimicking traditional labor unions.
Data unions are a way for users of big tech platforms to organize and exercise the power that their data is worth. In the same way that labor unions went on strike when their wages were too low, a data union could collectively decide to stop sharing their data with Facebook following some undesirable change to their ranking algorithm.
However, RadicalXChange does not only lobby for data unions and the labor metaphor on the basis of power – they also think it's a way to achieve meaning and dignity. In the capitalist paradigm, your worth as a human is derived from your output as a producer. According to this logic, the only way to live a dignified life when no longer working is to consider mindless browsing "working".

Most of the data you emit while browsing the web is used to target you with ads to sell you things you don’t need. If browsing is a job, it is a meaningless bullshit job. David Graeber has written about how bullshit jobs paired with a work ethic that associates output with self-worth is already causing massive psychological harm. Introducing a whole new class of meaningless “data bullshit jobs” will not make things better.
RadicalXChange recognizes that something has to happen for people to find meaning in the post-industrial era. However, instead of endorsing new ideologies, they try to port the capitalistic idea of your worth being defined by your output, and in doing so, perpetuate the problems caused by the attention economy.
In order to move forward, we need to move beyond our self-worth being defined by our output entirely – otherwise we're all doomed once AGI arrives.
Like this article? Consider buying me a coffee ☕️
No activity yet