Überwachungskapitalistische Biopolitik: Big Tech und die Regierung der Körper

Maschewski, Felix; Nosthoff, Anna-Verena

doi:10.1007/s41358-021-00309-9

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This leads to a conclusion that explains the risks of desolidarisation by way of outlining possibilities for shaping solidarity technologies. Felix Maschewski and Anna-Verena Nosthoff (2022) have a related subject but take a different focus. They show for the field of health policy how health markets are being restructured by the actions of leading technology companies in interaction with state authorities, insurance companies and research institutes.…”

Section: The Contributions To the Special Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

Political Theory of the Digital Constellation

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introductory contribution to this special issue on “Political Theory of the Digital Constellation” addresses the conditions and possibilities of political theory’s engagement with digital developments. The motivation for this inquiry is the growing interest in questions of political theory arising from the digital transformation, as well as the acknowledgement that digitalisation not only changes politics, but conversely that politics also shapes digitalisation. The article identifies three pitfalls of previous engagement: The narrowing of the subject of “digitalisation” to the topic of the “internet” and, thereby, to the aspect of communication, the disregard for the technicality of the digital, and the insufficient recognition that (digital) technology is political. To avoid these pitfalls, the research perspective of the digital constellation is presented. The digital constellation serves as an epistemological guide that helps to structure theoretical reflection on the interrelationship between digitalisation and political questions. Ultimately, the outlines of the political theory in the digital constellation become clear in the fourteen contributions of the special volume, which are presented in conclusion.

show abstract

Section: The Contributions To the Special Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

Political Theory of the Digital Constellation

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Primarily, these are the data subjects, i.e., patients. Regarding AI, transparency is seen as a desirable goal, while transparency regarding the patient is rather treated with skepticism ( Strotbaum and Reiß, 2017 , 367–369; Maschewski and Nosthoff, 2021 , n. p.; Prainsack, 2017 , 50–51; Pasquale, 2015 , 3–4). Here, too, the questions “transparent for whom?” and “transparent to what end?” show the multifaceted nature of transparency.…”

Section: Skepticism Towards the “Transparent Patient”mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the same time, methods of DL are deployed. This confronts stakeholders with self-learning systems based on a deep neural network with multiple hidden layers ( Goswami, 2020 , 8–10; Maschewski and Nosthoff, 2021 , n. p.). On the one hand, these multiple hidden layers increase the accuracy of a system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transparent human – (non-) transparent technology? The Janus-faced call for transparency in AI-based health care technologies

Ott

2022

Front. Genet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data in health care opens up new opportunities for the measurement of the human. Their application aims not only at gathering more and better data points but also at doing it less invasive. With this change in health care towards its extension to almost all areas of life and its increasing invisibility and opacity, new questions of transparency arise. While the complex human-machine interactions involved in deploying and using AI tend to become non-transparent, the use of these technologies makes the patient seemingly transparent. Papers on the ethical implementation of AI plead for transparency but neglect the factor of the “transparent patient” as intertwined with AI. Transparency in this regard appears to be Janus-faced: The precondition for receiving help - e.g., treatment advice regarding the own health - is to become transparent for the digitized health care system. That is, for instance, to donate data and become visible to the AI and its operators. The paper reflects on this entanglement of transparent patients and (non-) transparent technology. It argues that transparency regarding both AI and humans is not an ethical principle per se but an infraethical concept. Further, it is no sufficient basis for avoiding harm and human dignity violations. Rather, transparency must be enriched by intelligibility following Judith Butler’s use of the term. Intelligibility is understood as an epistemological presupposition for recognition and the ensuing humane treatment. Finally, the paper highlights ways to testify intelligibility in dealing with AI in health care ex ante, ex post, and continuously.

show abstract

“…Our analysis shows that-next to the extent and forms of pandemic solutionism-Big Tech's increasing involvement in numerous branches of healthcare reveals both the existential status of these companies and our dependency on their infrastructures, especially during the crisis. Our analysis also outlines the complexity and density of their power in multiple areas of our lives, some of which (including health care) are only beginning to emerge as research topics (see Sharon 2018;Nosthoff & Maschewski 2019;2022a;Gleiss et al 2021). Furthermore, existing studies of digital capitalism have hitherto neglected the role that societal crises play in the formation, reproduction, and strengthening of Big Tech's power by focusing on portraying leading actors in digital capitalism as disrupting agents that provoke crises of established industries (as exemplified by the famous motto 'move fast and break things'; cf.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What we conceive of as particularly vital is the critical analysis of how they establish private-public partnerships, such as with nation-states, research institutions, health institutions, the educational sector, etc., and thereby strengthen their own infrastructural power. (Maschewski & Nosthoff 2022b) dominant realms of Big Tech's involvement: (1) mapping COVID-19, (2) researching COVID-19, (3) tracing COVID-19, (4) treating and (5) managing In this context, we provide the first comprehensive overview of Big Tech's multifaceted engagement in researching COVID-19 based on wearable technology. Focusing on wearables is especially fruitful for our analysis as smart watches have been actively promoted as potentially beneficial tools for detecting the coronavirus early on.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pandemic Solutionism

Maschewski¹,

Nosthoff²

2022

Digital Culture &Amp; Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we investigate how Big Tech companies have used the novel coronavirus disease pandemic to increase their social, political, infrastructural, and epistemic power. We focus on four companies that were outspoken in their efforts to combat the virus: Alphabet (also known as Google), Apple, Facebook, and Amazon (GAFA). During the crisis, these companies evolved as adaptive entities that responded to the state of emergency by promptly rolling out various technological solutions, exemplifying what we call 'pandemic solutionism', that is, the belief in the potential to solve the complex virological crisis of COVID-19 through the integration of digital tools. We identify the activities of GAFA in pandemic solutionism in five key areas that can be defined as the dominant realms of Big Tech's involvement: (1) mapping COVID-19, (2) researching (3) tracing (4) treating and (5) managing In this context, we provide the first comprehensive overview of Big Tech's multifaceted engagement in researching COVID-19 based on wearable technologies, which have been actively promoted as potentially beneficial tools for detecting the coronavirus since the beginning of the crisis. Aditionally, through a critical mapping of the multiple activities of selected Big Tech players during the pandemic, it becomes evident how unexpected societal disruptions can lead to the increased dominance by these players. As we demonstrate, Big Tech companies have been able to present themselves as saviours capable of acting more promptly than the state, pushing pandemic solutionism and taking up tasks without being burdened by democratic deliberations. In doing so, they have manifested their infrastructural power, which frequently (such as with contact tracing) establishes the normative framework in which political and social actions take place.

show abstract

Überwachungskapitalistische Biopolitik: Big Tech und die Regierung der Körper

Cited by 7 publications

References 50 publications

Political Theory of the Digital Constellation

Political Theory of the Digital Constellation

Transparent human – (non-) transparent technology? The Janus-faced call for transparency in AI-based health care technologies

Pandemic Solutionism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About