Stepping back to move forward: Centering capital in discussions of technology and the future of work

Abstract

Some researchers have warned that advances in artificial intelligence will increasingly allow employers to substitute human workers with software and robotic systems, heralding an impending wave of technological unemployment. By attending to the particular contexts in which new technologies are developed and implemented, others have revealed that there is nothing inevitable about the future of work, and that there is instead the potential for a diversity of models for organizing the relationship between work and artificial intelligence. Although these social constructivist approaches allow researchers to identify sources of contingency in technological outcomes, they are less useful in explaining how aims and outcomes can converge across diverse settings. In this essay, I make the case that researchers of work and technology should endeavor to link the outcomes of artificial intelligence systems not only to their immediate environments but also to less visible—but nevertheless deeply influential—structural features of societies. I demonstrate the utility of this approach by elaborating on how finance capital structures technology choices in the workplace. I argue that investigating how the structure of ownership influences a firm’s technology choices can open our eyes to alternative models and politics of technological development, improving our understanding of how to make innovation work for everyone instead of allowing the benefits generated by technological change to be hoarded by a select few.

Unionizing High Tech: Opportunities and Obstacles

“…VC firms operate on a high-risk, high-reward investment logic: they expect the majority of their investments to fail and thus encourage their portfolio firms to pursue high-risk hypergrowth and moonshots able to return enough profit to make up for other losses. Venture capitalists compel tech firms to pursue go-big-or-go-home business models (Cooiman 2022; Shestakofsky 2020).…”

Platform capitalism and cloud infrastructure: Theorizing a hyper-scalable computing regime

“…The expansion of the platform form has been enabled by the longer arc of financialization, which makes available speculative capital and introduces new financialized dynamics in nonfinancial industries (Krippner, 2011) such as the software sector (Shestakofsky, 2020). Over the last 20 years, the number of companies listed in the US stock market has halved.…”

Artificial intelligence, algorithms, and social inequality: Sociological contributions to contemporary debates

“…Sociologists can theorize these developments by examining how social inequalities are structured, highlighting political economy, capitalism, and colonial relations (Couldry & Mejias, 2019; Dyer‐Witheford et al., 2019; Shestakofsky, 2020). While macro‐level social theories provide analytic tools for global transformations, sociologists can attend to the production of power and knowledge through genealogies (Denton et al., 2021) and ethnographies of AI research (Hoffman, 2021; Jaton, 2021).…”