FCJ-186 Hack for good: Speculative labour, app development and the burden of austerity

Gregg, Melissa

doi:10.15307/fcj.25.186.2015

Cited by 34 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the platforms (Quirky is an example) require prototype content to be submitted and involve upfront development and labour without pay. Innovation prizes and hackathons involve similarly precarious relationships, which critics argue is an exploitative labour process (Gregg, 2015;Soderberg, 2012).…”

Section: 3: Makerspace Criticismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Innovation, Democracy and Makerspaces

Smith¹

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: 3: Makerspace Criticismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Innovation, Democracy and Makerspaces

Smith¹

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Literature which acknowledges the limitations of neoliberal power, such as Gibson-G (2006) A Postcapitalist Politics, is also helpful here, as is scholarship which acknowledges that in the context of the exponential rise of data power, agency, advocacy and pleasure are also possible (Kennedy, Poell, andvan Dijck 2015, Ruckenstein 2014). But there is not much scholarship like this, as the emerging field of data studies has been dominated by critiques of the troubling and opaque forms of ' ways in which they produce neoliberal, entrepreneurial subjects aligned with Silicon Valley ideals of good worker subjectivity (Gregg 2015, Irani 2015 it does not address the pleasures that engagement in such events might invoke or the acts of resistance or advocacy that they might enable. In this sense, our paper makes an important contribution to data studies.…”

Section: Positioning: Locating Visualisation Pleasure and Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pleasure and Pain of Visualizing Data in Times of Data Power

Kennedy

Hill

2016

Television & New Media

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reflects on the growing urge amongst researchers to visualise large-scale digital data. It argues that the desire to visualise unfolds in the context of a complex entanglement of a) the pragmatics of data visualisation, b) the problematic ideological work that visualisations do, c) the politics of data power and neoliberalism, and d) visualisation pleasures. The paper begins by outlining the considerations that constitute data visualisation design, highlighting the complexity of the process. It then provides an overview of critical debates about the way that visualisations work which are relevant to reflective visualisation practice. Then it turns to the context (of datafication and the neoliberalisation of the university) in which academic researchers contemplate visualisation futures and which simultaneously constrains the realisation of these futures. Finally, the paper acknowledges the cracks in these structures, the pleasure of visualising data, for example in using visualisation for advocacy and social justice.

show abstract

“…At these )ompettons, )ompanies target the knowledge, innovaton and )reatve labour abundant in global )ites where a new iteraton of exploitng )rowdsour)ing a)tvites o))urs. Evident in ha)kathons, skilled part)ipants provide free labour with little promise of employment and small )han)es of winning )ompetton priies, while the volunteerism that motvates the part)ipaton only results in 'myopi) engagements with )ivi) or polit)al issues (Gregg, 2015).…”

Section: Urbanisation Of Shared Technology Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shared technology making in neoliberal ruins

Perng¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Published as an open a))ess pre-print on OSFPreprint: https://osf.io/k793w Abstract Shared te)hnology making refers to the pra)t)es, spa)es and events that bear the hope and belief that )ollaboratve and open ways of designing, making and modifying te)hnology )an improve our ways of living. Shared te)hnology making in the )ontext of the smart )ity reinvigorates exploratons of the possibility of free, open and )ollaboratve ways of engineering urban spa)es, infrastru)tures and publi) life. Open innovaton events and )ivi) ha)king initatves ofen en)ourage members of lo)al )ommunites, residents, or )ity administratons to part)ipate so that the problems they fa)e and the knowledge they possess )an be leveraged to develop innovatons from the working (and failure) of urban everyday life and (non-)expert knowledges. However, the in)orporaton of shared te)hnology making into urban )ontexts engender )on)erns around the right to part)ipate in shared te)hnology-and )ity-making. This paper addresses this issue by suggestng ways to )onsider both the neoliberal patterning of shared te)hnology making and the pat)hes and gaps that show the future possibility of shared )ity making. It explores the ways in whi)h shared te)hnology making are organised using ha)kathons and other ha)king initatves as an example. By providing a ha)kathon typology and detailed a))ounts of the experien)es of organisers and part)ipants of related events, the paper re)onsiders the neoliberalisaton of shared te)hnology making. It attends to the multple, entangled and )onfi)tual relatonships that do not follow )orporate logi) for )onsidering the possibilites of more open and )ollaboratve ways of te)hnology-and )ity-making.

show abstract

FCJ-186 Hack for good: Speculative labour, app development and the burden of austerity

Cited by 34 publications

References 1 publication

Social Innovation, Democracy and Makerspaces

Social Innovation, Democracy and Makerspaces

The Pleasure and Pain of Visualizing Data in Times of Data Power

Shared technology making in neoliberal ruins

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About