Important to have a con­ver­sa­tion about au­toma­tion - tons of jobs will be re­placed by ma­chine learn­ing etc.


  1. AUtomayion is a good thing. It will and al­ready has dis­rupted many as­pects of our lives. Often has neg­a­tive out­comes on a lot of peo­ple
  2. Automation is bad. The po­ten­tial from au­to­mated pro­duc­tion is im­mense. If ben­e­fits can be dis­trib­uted things will be great
  3. auo­ma­tion is purely an eco­nomic thing. Washing ma­chine is a bet­ter pro­gres­sive tech­nol­ogy than your phone. No ones ever been re­lieved when their wm broke, wheres we are with phones.
  4. Automation can­not af­fect artists and de­sign­ers, eg its ir­rel­e­vant to our prac­tice. What kind of economci sup­port will there be for the art when ser­vice jobs will be taken away - how will artists fi­ance shit. What new re­cource will be avail­able from us from au­toma­tion, dis­tri­b­u­tion, vr, pro­duc­tion, 3d print­ing, ma­te­ri­als. It’s up to us to afect what vo­cab and im­agery we use to talk about new tech­nol­ogy. We use sci­ence fic­tion to talk about au­toma­tion, which comes from peo­ple like us. What nar­ra­tives do we use to talk about au­toma­tion


Tuur van Balen

Who makes and who is made Salmon vac­ci­na­tion ma­chine Har­roway: Cyborg Manifesto

Dialysis ward peo­ple talk about their re­la­tion­ship with the ma­chines peo­ple feel like they’re slaves to the ma­chine - it keeps you alive but it also keeps you pris­oner” Are you a cy­borg? These folks can’t live with­out the ma­chines. Made a re­sponse where sheep is a dial­y­sis ma­chine. Retired grey­hound be­comes me­chan­i­cal ven­ti­la­tor. Tension be­tween a or­ganic tech­no­log­i­cal de­vice

FOund a room for dis­carded ma­chines. The Immortal. All sorts of life sup­port ma­chines are con­nected to each other, there just is­n’t a pa­tient. Minerals are added and re­moved. They’re keep­ing each other alive for­ever, pump­ing around a blood re­place­ment for­ever. THe in­stal­la­tion takes up a room whereas the same sys­tem in our body only takes up a smaller space fritc kahn, hu­man body seen as in­dus­try palace. Body seen as a fac­tory of blood and oxy­gen. Installation re­flects how west­ern med­i­cine sees our body’same

75 Watt (2015)

A loabourer over he course of an 8 hour day can sus­tain an av­er­age out­put of 75 watts

Designed an ob­ject that has no func­tion ex­cept to cre­ate a core­og­tapy of chi­nese work­ers as­sem­bling it in a fac­tory. All the di­men­sions and stuff ex­ists to cre­ate a spe­cific move­ment. Got ac­cess to the fac­tory and filmed the as­sem­bly. Made 45 ob­jects + a film

ten­sion be­tween ma­chines try­ing to act like bodys, bodys asked to be­have like ma­chines Made in china, com­mu­nism vs cap­i­tal­ism etc

Art can’t ex­ists out­side of real world pro­duc­tion, we have to re­con­struct stuff from the in­side

Frank + Lillian Gilbreth long ex­po­sure pho­tog­ra­phy to re­veal the ef­fi­ciency and in­ef­fi­ciency of fac­tory work­ers. Lights placed on work­ers hands and # text

The prin­ci­ples of sci­en­tific man­age­ment

early 20 cen­tury, when the con­veyor belt started to be­come a thing.

Kingyo Kingdom

work around gold­fish and the body of the an­i­mal. re­la­tion­ship with gold­fish, na­ture. Fish that don’t ex­ist in na­ture. The more un­nat­ural the fish are the more suc­ces­ful they tend to be in com­pe­ti­tions. Super long his­tory back to edo pe­riod. -> bon­sai breed­ing Sym­bol­ised na­ture pro­duc­tion of fish as a tech­ni­cal, eco­nomic, so­cial, cul­tural process. Worked with a sci­en­tist to make a batch of gold­fish fo them that can’t re­pro­duce, that does­n’t have any re­pro­duc­tive or­gans. Living or­gan­ism as an ob­ject, liv­ing art ob­ject. Lifestyle pets. com show up ster­ile so you can’t make more of the and ruin the busi­ness model

made a ma­chine that can make a gold­fish that can’t re­por­duce. Injects fish em­bryos etc What hap­pens when the fish die etc

on­go­ing pro­ject

when­ever in the last cen­tury and a half there was an acute de­mand for a cer­tain min­eral on the in­ter­na­tional mar­ket - ivory in vis­to­rian …

min­er­als used in tech­nol­ogy comes from congo fo rthe most part, on­go­ing con­filct etc we carry around with us a bt of a place that we know noth­ing about of­ten at the start of in­dus­tral pro­duc­tion is a kid with a shovel

Brett Scott

@suitpossum Hacking the fu­ture of money (book)

Things that are on the mar­ket have util­ity and some hu­man pro­duc­tion process at­tached to them hu­man labour com­po­nent is be­ing eroded out­puts of one pro­duc­tion cy­cle can be in­puts for a new cy­cle

cap­i­tal­ist pro­duc­tion

You en­ter mar­kets to get in­puts (eg raw ma­te­ri­als, labour) to cre­ate out­puts peo­ple who make the stuff don’t own the ma­chines (eg means of pro­duc­tions)

au­toma­tion is about mak­ing ma­chines to re­place man­ual labour, that’s why there is so much in­vest­ment

peo­ple think ser­vice econ­omy is di­vorced from raw re­cources, but it re­lies on phones eg cop­per and what­not Tools take hu­man force and am­plify it Now a ma­chine is an as­sem­bly of in­ter­con­nected parts, and it has a non-hu­man en­ergy source. They have an in­ter­face that al­lows you to in­ter­act with them. You don’t op­er­ate the ma­chine di­rectly A Robot is a ma­chine that is able to make forms of lim­ited de­sci­sions. It can take in in­for­ma­tion from teh en­vi­ron­ment and send out an out­put to make it­self do some­thing. More ad­vanced ro­bots have more sen­sors, more op­tions of ac­tions. Peo­ple tend to think of ro­bots as hu­man forms, but most of them don’t look any­thing like that Computers have in­puts and out­puts So now we’re con­nect­ing com­put­ers eg the in­ter­ent. You’ve made a Meta Computer

Algorobotic sys­tems eg Uber, al­go­rith­mic sys­tem with in­puts, dat­a­cen­ter and at the end an ac­tual per­son in a car

Domestic au­toma­tion

gen­der and labour, gen­der as a kind of labour, so­cial re­por­duc­tio eg re­por­duc­tive labour. Nurturing the next gen­er­a­tion of work­ers. Thinking of the home as an­other waged and un­waged work­place. Think about the kinds of work that hap­pen in the home.

Women race and class

scoial struc­tures are re­in­forced by the prim­i­tive­ness of home labour, has­n’t been much af­fected by au­toma­tion ect. Domestic labour sav­ing de­vices do not ac­tu­ally have a great track record when it comes to sav­ing time.

why has time spent not gone down? As ap­pli­ances be­came a thing, stan­dards shot up. stuff had to be cleaner, ed­u­ca­tion more in­tense to give kids an ad­van­tage, food sup­posed to be much more com­plex. Applicances ma y be used to in­crease out­put rathr that re­duc­ing the burd­nen on in­di­vi­ual work­ers.

ba­nana slicer slushy ma­chines roomba

looks fancy but cre­ates ad­di­tional main­tainance eg clean­ing the fil­ter etc, re­place­ment parts new bat­ter­ies. It’s tak­ing up more time some­where else that what it’s sav­ing in one par­tic­u­lar area.

the maret is in­ter­ested in sell­ing us stuff, not chang­ing tra­di­tional fam­ily labour

Jibo, the first so­cial ro­bot for the home se­ri­ously GO­ing back to 1960s vi­sion of the fu­ture

tech­nol­ogy is shown as seper­ate from tra­di­tional Domestic fam­ily life

it’s not all bad eg as­sis­tive tech­nol­ogy, con­tra­cep­tive pill, bi­cy­cle etc a lot of do­mes­tic ap­pli­cances are an af­ter­thought from mil­i­tary, com­mer­cial use, eg the mi­crowave, fridge

con­sid­er­a­tions have to go be­yond jsut the smart home into what fam­ily struc­ture we live in, forms of re­la­tion­ships, forms of or­gan­i­sa­tions we work in

xenofem­i­nist Manifesto

Feminists in the 20th cen­tury al­ready imag­ined how the built en­vi­ron­ment could be changed to re­duce the amount of labour re­quired. Also big­ger groups of peo­ple as op­posed to tra­di­tional fam­ily sprads work around and makes shop­ping etc more ef­fi­cient

#qs how do you think about hack­ing