Philosophical Disquisitions

[Note: This was previously posted on my Algocracy project blog; I'm cross-posting it here now. The audio quality isn't perfect but the content is very interesting. It is a talk by Pip Thornton, the (former) Research Assistant on the project]. My post as research assistant on the Algocracy & Transhumanism project at NUIG has come to an end. I have really enjoyed the five months I have spent here in Galway - I  have learned a great deal from the workshops I have been involved in, the podcasts I have edited, the background research I have been doing for John on the project, and also from the many amazing people I have met both in and outside the university. I  have also had the opportunity to present my own research to a  wide audience and most recently gave a talk on behalf of the Technology and Governance research cluster entitled A Critique of Linguistic Capitalism (and an artistic intervention)  as part of a seminar series organised by the  Whitaker Institute's Ideas Forum,  which I managed to record. Part of my research involves using poetry to critique linguistic capitalism and the way language is both written and read in an age of algorithmic reproduction. For the talk I invited Galway poet Rita Ann Higgins to help me explore the the differing 'value' of words, so the talk includes Rita Ann reciting an extract from her award winning poem Our Killer City, and my own imagining of what the poem 'sounds like' - or is worth, to Google. The argument central to my thesis is that the power held by the tech giant Google, as it mediates, manipulates and extracts economic value from the language (or more accurately the decontextualised linguistic data) which flows through its search, communication and advertising systems, needs both transparency and strong critique. Words are auctioned off to the highest bidder, and become little more than tools in the creation of advertising revenue. But there are significant side effects, which can be both linguistic and political. Fake news sites are big business for advertisers and Google, but also infect the wider discourse as they spread through social media networks and national consciousness. One of the big questions I am now starting to ask is just how resilient is language to this neoliberal infusion, and what could it mean politically? As the value of language shifts from conveyor of meaning to conveyor of capital, how long will it be before the linguistic bubble bursts? You can download it HERE or listen below: Track Notes 0:00- introduction and background 4:30 - Google Search & autocomplete - digital language and semantic escorts 6:20 - Linguistic Capitalism and Google AdWords - the wisdom of a linguistic marketplace?9:30 - Google Ad Grants - politicising free ads: the Redirect Method, A Clockwork Orange and the neoliberal logic of countering extremism via Google search 16:00 - Google AdSense - fake news sites, click-bait and ad revenue  -  from Chicago ballot boxes to Macedonia - the ads are real but the news is fake 20:35 - Interventions #1 - combating AdSense (and Breitbart News) - the Sleeping Giants Twitter campaign 23:00 - Interventions #2 - Gmail and the American Psycho experiment 25:30 - Interventions #3 - my own {poem}.py project - critiquing AdWords using poetry, cryptography and a second hand receipt printer 30:00 - special guest poet Rita Ann Higgins reciting Our Killer City 33:30 - Conclusions - a manifestation of postmodernism? sub-prime language - when does the bubble burst? commodified words as the master's tools - problems  of method Relevant Links The Redirect Method From Headline to Photograph, a Fake News Masterpiece - New York Times, 18 January 2017How Facebook Powers Money Machines for Obscure Political 'News' Sites - The Guardian, 24 August 2016How Teens in the Balkans are Duping Trump Supporters with Fake News - Buzzfeed, 4 November 2016How t

[If you like this blog, consider signing up for the newsletter...] In this episode I talk to Karen Yeung. Karen is a Chair in Law at the Dickson Poon School of Law, Kings College London. She joined the School to help establish the Centre for Technology, Ethics and Law & Society (‘TELOS’), of which she is now Director.  Professor Yeung is an academic pioneer in the field of regulation studies (or ‘regulatory governance’ studies) and is a leading scholar concerned with critically examining governance of, and governance through, new and emerging technologies. We talk about her concept of 'hypernudging' and how it applies to the debate about algorithmic governance. You can download the episode here. You can also listen below or subscribe on Stitcher or iTunes (via RSS). Show Notes0:00 - Introduction2:20 - What is regulation? Regulation vs Governance6:35 - The Different Modes of Regulation11:50 - What is nudging?15:40 - Big data and regulation21:15 - What is hypernudging?32:30 - Criticisms of nudging: illegitimate motive, deception and opacity41:00 - Applying these criticisms to hypernudging47:35 - Dealing with the challenges of hypernudging52:40 - Digital Gerrymandering and Fake News59:20 - The need for a post-liberal philosophy?  Relevant LinksKaren's Homepage at KCLCentre for Technology, Ethics, Law and Society'Hypernudge': Big Data as a Mode of Regulation by Design - by Karen'Are Design-Based Regulatory Instruments Legitimate?' - by Karen'Algocracy as Hypernudging' - by John Danaher'The Ethics of Nudging' - by Cass SunsteinEpisode on Predictive Policing with Andrew Ferguson      

[If you like this blog, consider signing up for the newsletter...] In this episode I talk to Andrew Guthrie Ferguson about the past, present and future of predictive policing. Andrew is a Professor at the David A Clarke School of Law at the University of the District of Columbia. He was formerly a supervising attorney at the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia. He now teaches and writes in the area of criminal law, criminal procedure, and evidence. We discuss the ideas and arguments from his recent paper 'Policing Predictive Policing. You can download the episode here or listen below. You can also subscribe on Stitcher and iTunes (via RSS). Show Notes0:00 - Introduction2:55 - Why did Andrew start researching this topic?4:50 - What is predictive policing?6:25 - Hasn't policing always been predictive? What is the history of prediction in policing?8:50 - How does predictive policing work? (Understanding Predictive Policing 1.0)16:18 - Why the interest in this technology post-2009?18:50 - The shift from place-based to person-based prediction (Predictive Policing 2.0 and 3.0)24:35 - Are the concerns about person-based prediction overstated?28:18 - How does predictive policing differ from policies like 'broken windows' policing?31:40 - Are predictive policing systems racially biased? (Data vulnerabilities)41:44 - Do predictive policing systems actually work?52:46 - Are predictive policing systems transparent/accountable?58:26 - How do these systems change police practice?1:02:50 - Alternative visions for the use of predictive powers1:10:22 - What about data security, privacy and data protection?1:14:15 - Is the future dystopian or utopian? Relevant LinksProfessor Ferguson's Webpage'Policing Predictive Policing' by Andrew Guthrie Ferguson'Big Data and Predictive Reasonable Suspicion' by Andrew Guthrie Ferguson'The Big Data Jury' by Andrew Guthrie Ferguson'Predictive Prosecution' by Andrew Guthrie FergusonPredPol: The Predictive Policing Company'Machine Bias' on ProPublica.org'Randomized Controlled Field Trials of Predictive Policing' by Mohler et alRAND report on Predictive Policing

In this episode I talk to Jonathan Pugh about bio-conservatism and human enhancement. Jonny is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Applied Moral Philosophy at The University of Oxford, on the Wellcome Trust funded project "Neurointerventions in Crime Prevention: An Ethical Analysis". His new paper, written with Guy Kahane and Julian Savulescu,  'Bio-Conservatism, Partiality, and The Human Nature Objection to Enhancement' is due out soon in The Monist. You can download the episode here or listen below. You can also subscribe on Stitcher and iTunes (via RSS). Show Notes 0:00 - introduction 2:00 - what is the nature of human enhancement – the functionalist and welfarist accounts/models 10:30 - bio-conservative oppositions to enhancement – evaluative and epistemic approaches, the naturalistic fallacy 19:00 - Cohen’s conservatism – intrinsic value – personal and particular valuing – art and pets30:30 – personal values and bio-enhancement 40:30 - the partiality problem – who would you save from the river? Value-based partiality and discrimination. 54:00 - species bias, human prejudice, partiality, family and nationalism - Bernard Williams, John Cottingham, Thomas Hurka, Samuel Scheffler, genetic enhancement 1:03:00 -  should human enhancement be opposed on the grounds of bio-conservatism? - Biological enhancement in the context of other social and technical changes - Is conservatism a foundational moral principle? 1:11:00 - conclusion Relevant Links Jonny's Academia.edu page Jonny's blog - jonathanpughethics.wordpress.com Pugh, Kahane, and Savulescu - Bio-Conservatism, Partiality, and The Human Nature Objection to Enhancement (forthcoming)  Pugh, Kahane, and Savulescu - Cohen's Conservatism and Human Enhancement (2013) Samuel Scheffler - Death and the Afterlife (2013) Alfonso Cuaron - Children of Men (2006) Ben Davies - Enhancement and Conservative Bias (2016) Bernard Williams - The Human Prejudice (2006) John Cottingham - Partiality, Favouritism and Morality (1986) Thomas Hurka - The Justification of National Partiality (1997) John Danaher - An Evaluative Conservative Case for Biomedical Enhancement

[If you like this blog, consider signing up for the newsletter...] In this episode I talk to Professor Steve Fuller about his sometimes controversial views on transhumanism, religion, science and technology, enhancement and evolution. Steve is Auguste Comte Professor of Social Epistemology at the University of Warwick. He is the author of a trilogy relating to the idea of a ‘post-’ or ‘trans-‘ human future, all published with Palgrave Macmillan: Humanity 2.0: What It Means to Be Human Past, Present and Future (2011), Preparing for Life in Humanity 2.0 (2012) and (with Veronika Lipinska) The Proactionary Imperative: A Foundation for Transhumanism (2014). Our conversation focuses primarily on the arguments and ideas found in the last book of the trilogy. You can download the episode here or listen below. You can also subscribe via Stitcher or iTunes (via RSS). Show Notes 0:00 - introduction 04:00 - untangling posthumanism and transhumanism via Bostrom, Hayles, Haraway 21:45 - the relationship between theology, science and technology39:50 - theological and libertarian rationales of transhumanism 52:00 - freedom from suffering or a freedom to suffer? – questions of risk, consent and compensation 1:03:40 - the rehabilitation of Eugenics – could it / should it be done? 1:13:50 - Darwinism and the intelligent design debate 1:22:00 - are there limits to transhumanism and enhancement? Homo Sapiens, humanity and morphological freedom 1:28:00 - conclusion Relevant Links Rick Searle - podcast on the Dark Side of Transhumanism (2016)  Nick Bostrom - Why I Want To Be a Posthuman When I Grow Up (2008)  Donna Haraway - The Cyborg Manifesto (1991)  N. Katherine Hayles - How we became Posthuman (1999)  Ray Kurzweil - The Singularity is Near (2005)  James Hughes - podcast on the Transhumanist Political Project (2016)  Zoltan Istvan's Transhumanist Party  The Oxford Handbook of the History of Eugenics Bostrom & Sandberg - The wisdom of nature: an evolutionary heuristic for human enhancement (2009)    

In this episode I talk to Anders Sandberg about the ethical implications of time compression - or the speeding up of computational tasks to quantum levels. Anders is research associate to the Oxford Martin Programme on the Impacts of Future Technology, the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, and the Oxford Centre for Neuroethics. His research at the Future of Humanity Institute centres on management of low-probability high-impact risks, societal and ethical issues surrounding human enhancement, estimating the capabilities of future technologies, and very long-range futures. He is currently senior researcher in the FHI-Amlin collaboration on systemic risk of risk modelling. I ask Anders about his latest research on time compression in computing, and about the effects this might have on human values and society.  You download the episode here. You can listen below. You can also subscribe on Stitcher and iTunes (via RSS). Show Notes0.00 – Introduction1:00 – the future of humanity in the face of the Trump election3:50 – the ethics and risks of time compression in computing – speed, space and Moore’s law9:50 – quantum computing and its limits, the Margolus Levitin limit, the Beckenstein Bound, algorithmic complexity & the ultimate laptop18:40  - limits of cryptography and light speed28:20 – why speed and time matter in human life – the economics of productivity36:35 – the value of temporal location – being first/being last – winner takes all markets – hyperbolic discounting46:15  - automated trading & high frequency trading algorithms – instability, speed and space – flash crashes – algorithms and their sense of humour56:00 – speed inequalities & mismatches, loss of control, hard take-off scenarios - technological unemployment1:12:50  - can we speed up humans?  Relevant Links Anders' contribution to From Algorithmic States to Algorithmic Brains Anders' webpage at the Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford Richard Feynman – Plenty of Room at the Bottom (1959) Bernard Williams - The Makropulos case: reflections on the tedium of immortality Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow            

[This is a cross-post from the Algocracy and Transhumanism blog. It's a short podcast by the Research Assistant on the Project - Pip Thornton. Check out her blog here] I started work as the research assistant on the Algocracy and Transhumanism project in September, and John has invited me to record a short podcast about some of my own PhD research on Language in the Age of Algorithmic Reproduction. You download the podcast here or listen above.   The podcast relates to a project called {poem}.py, which is explained in greater detail here on my blog. The project involves making visible the workings of linguistic capitalism by printing out receipts for poetry which has been passed through Google's advertising platform AdWords.   I have presented the project twice now - each time asking fellow presenters for their favourite poem or lyric which I can then process through the Keyword planner and print out on a receipt printer for them to take home. I often get asked what is the most expensive poem, and of course it depends on the length, but the winner so far is The Wasteland by T.S. Eliot, which was requested by David Gunkel at the Algorithmic Brains to Algorithmic States workshop in September, and which came in at £1738.57 and several metres. In the podcast I use 3 clips - an excerpt from The Wasteland, a performance poem by Jemima Foxtrot, and the introduction to  Billy Bragg's Between the Wars - and think about how the words contained in each piece might fare in the linguistic marketplace. You can watch Jemima's performance in full below. Jemima Foxtrot - Bog Eye Man from Craig Bilham on Vimeo. I also want to give a proper airing to Rita Ann Higgins' poem Our Killer City, which I reference in the podcast, but play an 'alternative' version of. You can watch Rita reciting her poem below.

In this episode I talk to Nicole Vincent. Nicole is an international philosopher extraordinaire. She has appointments at Georgia State University, TU Delft (Netherlands) and Macquarie University (Sydney). Nicole's work focuses on the philosophy of responsibility, cognitive enhancement and neuroethics. We talk about two main topics: (i) can neuroscience make us happier? and (ii) how should we think about radically changing ourselves through technology?   You can download the episode here. You can also listen below or subscribe on Stitcher or iTunes (via RSS feed). Show Notes0:00 - 0:50 - Introduction to Nicole0:50 - 8:50 - What is a happy life? Objective vs Subjective Views8:50 - 13:20 - What is a meaningful life? Does meaning differ from happiness?13:20 - 17:03 - Who knows best about our own happiness? Can scientists tell if we are happy?17:03 - 25:25 - The distinction between occurrent (in the moment) happiness and dispostitional (predictive) happiness25:25 - 37:05 - The danger of scientists thinking they know best about occurrent happiness37:05 - 46:20 - Could scientists know best about dispositional happiness?46:20 - 56:05 - Neuroplasticity and the normative value of facts about the brain56:05 - 1:01:45 - What if technology allows us to change everything about ourselves?1:01:45 -1:05:40 - Nicole's opposition to radical transhumanism1:05:40 - 1:13:50 - How should we think about transformative change?1:13:50 - End - How should society regulate technologies that allow for transformative change?  Relevant LinksNicole's homepageNicole talking about Enhancing Responsibility at TEDxSydneyNicole's framework for understanding responsibilityNicole's paper with Stephanie Hare 'Happiness, Cerebroscopes and Incorrigibility: Prospects for Neuroeduaimonia''Who knows best? Personal Happiness and the Search for a Good Life' - John DanaherTransformative Experience - LA Paul'What you can't expect when you are expecting' - LA Paul

In this episode I interview programmer and lawyer Aaron Wright. Aaron is an expert in corporate and intellectual property law, with extensive experience in Internet and new technology issues. He is a professor at Cardozo Law School and the Director of the School's Tech Startup Clinic. I speak to Aaron about the issues arising from his forthcoming book about blockchain technology and the law (co-authored with Primavera De Filippi) that will be published by Harvard University Press. You can download the episode here. You can listen below. You can also subscribe on Stitcher and iTunes via RSS. Show Notes0:00 – 1:58 - Introduction1:58 – 8:08 – what is a block chain?8:08 – 11:10 – explanation of bitcoin11:10 – 15:00 – the role of cryptography in the block chain15:00 – 19:55 – consensus based networks19:55 – 27:15 – what are the other uses of the block chain?27:15 – 32.40 – using micropayments for content access32:40 – 48:20 – organising human behaviour by smart contracts –48:20 – 54:42 - the internet of things54:42 – 56:24 - how safe and secure are block chains?56:24 – 1:02:40 – Ethereum hack1:02:40 – 1:10:50 - the asymmetry problem1:10:50 – 1:16:14 – regulating the block chain & the lex cryptographia1:16:14 – 1:20:40 – lex mercatoria & lex informatica1:20:40 – End – forthcoming book and other publications  Relevant Links Decentralized Blockchain Technology and the Rise of Lex Cryptographia – Aaron Wright & Primavera De Filippi Blockchains and the Emergence of a Lex Cryptographia – from John’s blog Future Crimes : Inside the Digital Underground and the Battle for Our Connected World - Marc Goodman Bitcoin is teaching realism to Libertarians : An interview with an Old-School Cypherpunk Lex Informatica : Foundations of Law on the Internet - Aron Mefford Lex Mercatoria : The Emergence of a Self-Regulated Bitcoin               

In this episode I interview Dr Laura Cabrera. Laura is an Assistant Professor at the Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences at Michigan State University where she conducts research into the ethical and societal implications of neurotechnology. I ask Laura how human enhancement can affect inter-personal communication and values and talk about the issues in her recent book Rethinking Human Enhancement : Social Enhancement and Emergent Technologies. You download the show here or listen below. You can also subscribe on Stitcher and iTunes (click 'add to iTunes').  Show Notes0:00 – 1:00 - Introduction1:00 – 11:15 - What is human enhancement- definitions and translations11:15 – 13:35 - Discussing moral enhancement - Savulescu and Persson13:35 – 14:35 - Human enhancement and communication - discussing Laura’s paper with John Wekert14:35 – 28:40 - Shared lifeworlds, similar bodies, communication problems28:40 – 39:48 - Augmented reality and sensory perception39:48 – 46:20 - Cognitive capacity and memory – Oliver Sacks & Borges46:20 – 49:50 - Ethics – hermeneutic crises and empathy gaps49:50 – 52:30 - Can technology solve communication problems?53:32 – 1:00:00 - What are human values?1:00:00 – 1:08:20 - How does cognitive enhancement affect values?1:08:20 – 1:16:00 – Neoliberalism values - pressures and competitiveness1:16:00 – End - How to prioritise values and see the positives in enhancement  Relevant LinksLaura's recent book  Rethinking Human Enhancement Social Enhancement and Emergent TechnologiesHuman enhancement and communication: on meaning and shared understanding - Laura Cabrera & John WeckertLaura's homepage at the Center for Ethics & Humanities in the Life SciencesThe Perils of Cognitive Enhancement and the Urgent Imperative to Enhance the Moral Character of Humanity - by Savulescu & PerssonWhat is it like to be a Bat?  - Thomas NagelThe Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat - Oliver SacksThe Country of the Blind - H.G. WellsFunes the Memorious - Borges

In this episode I interview Rick Searle. Rick is an author living in Amish country in Pennsylvania. He is a prolific writer and commentator on all things technological. I get Rick to educate me about the darker aspects of the transhumanist philosophy. In particular, what Rick finds disturbing in the writings of Zoltan Istvan, Steve Fuller and the Neoreactionaries. You can download the episode here. You can listen below. You can also subscribe on Stitcher or iTunes (click add to 'iTunes'). Show Notes0:00 - 1:40 - Introduction1:40 - 4:40 - Rick's definition of Transhumanism4:40 - 10:10 - Zoltan Istvan and the Transhumanist Wager10:10 - 16:35 - The philosophy of teleological egocentric functionalism - Ayn Rand on steroids?16:35 - 22:30 - Steve Fuller's Humanity 2.022:30 - 28:00 - Some disturbing conclusions?28:00 - 32:20 - The ontology and ethics of Humanity 2.032:20 - 36:55 - Stalinism as Transhumanism43:25 - 47:00 - Transhumanism as religion47:00 - 56:30 - The neo-reactionaries of Silicon Valley56:30 - End - Is democracy fit for the future?  Relevant LinksRick Searle's blog Utopia or Dystopia?Rick's profile page on the IEETThe Transhumanist Wager - by Zoltan Istvan'Betting Against the Transhumanist Wager' - by Rick Searle'The Terrifying Banality of Humanity 2.0' - by Rick SearleHumanity 2.0 - by Steve Fuller'We May Look Crazy to Them but They Look Like Zombies to Us" - by Steve Fuller (this generated lots of controversy on the IEET page when published. To be clear, Fuller claims he was using irony to make a point about the transhumanist worldview)'Politics as Zombie Warfare: Against Steve Fuller's Transhumanism' - by David Roden'Stalinism as Transhumanism' - by Rick Searle'Silicon Secessionists' - by Rick Searle'Shedding Light on Peter Thiel's Dark Enlightenment' - by Rick Searle'Mouthbreathing Machiavellis Dream of a Silicon Reich' - by Corey Pein, The Baffler

In this episode I talk to Sabina Leonelli. Sabina is an Associate Professor at the Department of Sociology, Philosophy and Anthropology at the University of Exeter. She is as the Co-Director of the Exeter Centre for the Study of the Life Sciences (Egenis), where she leads the Data Studies research strand. Her research focuses primarily on the philosophy of science and in particular on the philosophy of data intensive science. Her work is currently supported by the ERC Starting Grant DATA_SCIENCE. I talk to Sabina about the impact of big data on the scientific method and how large databases get constructed and used in scientific inquiry. You can listen below. You can also download here, or subscribe via Stitcher and iTunes (just click add to iTunes). Show Notes0:00 - 1:40 - Introduction1:40 - 10:19 - How the scientific method is traditionally conceived and how data is relevant to the method as traditionally conceived.10:19 - 13:40 - Big Data in science13:40 - 18:30 - Will Big Data revolutionise scientific inquiry? Three key arguments18:30 - 24:13 - Criticisms of these three arguments24:13 - 29:20 - How model organism databases get constructed in the biosciences29:20 - 36:30 - Data journeys in science (Step 1): Decontextualisation36:30 - 41:20 - Data journeys in science (Step 2): Recontextualisation41.20 - 47:15 - Opacity and bias in databases51:55 - 57:00 - Data journeys in science (Step 3): Usage57:00 - 1:00:30 - The Replicability Crisis and Open Data1:00:30 - End - Transparency and legitimacy and dealing with different datasets  Relevant LinksDr Leonelli's HomepageThe DataScience Project (The Epistemology of Data Intensive Science)'What difference does quantity make? On the Epistemology of Big Data in Biology' by Sabina Leonelli'Why the current insistence on Open Access to Scientific Data? Big Data, Knowledge Production and the Political Economy of Contemporary Biology' by Sabina Leonelli'Sticks and Carrots: Encouraging Open Science at its Source' by Sabina Leonelli, Daniel Spichtinger, and Barbara PrainsackBig Data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work and think by Cukier and Mayer-Schonberger'Big Data is Better Data' by Kenneth Cukier (Ted Talk)Model Organism Databases - links to the leading model organism databasesEstimating the reproducibility of psychological evidence (by Nosek et al)No evidence for a replicability crisis in psychological science (by Gilbert et al)

This is the tenth episode in the Algocracy and Transhumanism Podcast. In this episode I talk to David Gunkel. David is a professor of communication studies at Northern Illinois University. He specialises in the philosophy and ethics of technology. He is the author of several books, including Hacking Cyberspace, The Machine Question and Of Remixology. I talk to David about two main topics: (i) robot rights and responsibilities and (ii) the cyborgification of society. You can download the episode at this link. You can listen below. You can also subscribe on Stitcher and iTunes (via RSS - click on 'add to iTunes'). Show Notes0:00 - 1:50 - Introduction1:50 - 4:23 - Robots in the News4:23 - 10:46 - How to think about robots: agency vs patiency1:46- 13:20 - The problem of distributed agency13:20 - 18:00 - Robots as tools, machines and agents18:00 - 24:25 - The spectrum of robot autonomy24:25 - 28:04 - Machine learning: is it different this time?28:04 - 39:40 - Should robots have rights and responsibilities?39:40 - 43:55 - New moral patients and emotional manipulation43:55 - 57:14 - Understanding the three types of cyborg57:14 - 1:02:26 - The Borg and the Hivemind Society1:02:26 - End - Cyborgification as a threat to Enlightenment values    Relevant LinksDavid's HomepageHacking Cyberspace by DavidThe Machine Question by DavidOf Remixology by David'Responsible Machines: The Opportunities and Challenges of Artificial Autonomous Agents' by David'Facing Animals: A relational, other-oriented approach to moral standing' by David'Resistance is Futile: Cyborgs, Humanism and the Borg' by David'Ecce Cyborg: The Subject of Communication' by David'Is modern technology creating a Borg-like society?' by John Danaher'Is Resistance Futile? Are we already Borg?' by John Danaher'Robots, Law and the Retribution Gap' by John DanaherThe Bomb Robot and the Dallas shooterEU Parliament report on Civil Law Rules and Robots'Microsoft's disastrous Tay experiment shows hidden dangers of AI' by John West'How Google's Alpha Go beat Lee Sedol', Christopher Moyer, The Atlantic'The Question Concerning Technology' by Martin HeideggerPeter Paul Verbeek - University of Twente'Robots should be slaves' by Joanna Bryson'Extending legal protection to social robots' by Kate Darling'A Cyborg Manifesto' by Donna Haraway'How we became Posthuman' by N Katherine Hayles

This is the fourth episode in the Algocracy and Transhumanism Podcast. In this episode I interview Evan Selinger. Evan is a Professor of Philosophy at the Rochester Institute for Technology. He is widely-published scholar in the ethics and law of technology. He is currently working on a book with Brett Frischmann entitled Being Human in the 21st Century which is due out with Cambridge University Press in 2017. In this interview we talk about two main topics: (i) the ethics of technological outsourcing and (ii) the value of privacy and the nature of obscurity. You can listen to the podcast below. You can download the mp3 here. You can also subscribe via Stitcher and iTunes. Show Notes0:00 - 1:25 - Introduction to Evan  1:25 - 8:50 - What is algorithmic outsourcing? The fundamental structure of outsourcing8:50 - 14:50 - Technological and non-technological examples of outsourcing   14:50 - 18:50 - Cognitive vs Affective Outsourcing  18:50 - 28:00 - Outsourcing interpersonal communications  28:00 - 32:20 - Objections to the outsourcing of interpersonal communications  32:20 - 41:00 - Is this a problem with technology or something technology encourages?  41:00 - 45:50 - What is privacy?  45.50 - 53:45 - What is obscurity? How does it relate to privacy?  53:45 - 1:02:20 - Is obscurity under threat?  1:02:20 - End - Isn't privacy dead? Shouldn't we embrace total transparency?    LinksEvan's Homepage'The Outsourced Lover' by Evan Selinger, The Atlantic'Today's Apps are Turning us Into Psychopaths' by Evan Selinger, Wired'Outsourcing your Mind and Intelligence to Computer/Phone Apps' by Evan Selinger, IEET.'Don't Outsource Your Dating Life' by Evan Selinger, CNNBroAppAllo - Google Messaging App'Surveillance as Loss of Obscurity' by Hartzog and Selinger'Obscurity and Privacy' by Hartzog and SelingerCrystal - app for determining psychological profiles'Philosopher Michael Lynch Says Privacy Violations are an Affront to Human Dignity' by Evan Selinger

This is the ninth episode in the Algocracy and Transhumanism Podcast. In this episode I talk to Rachel O'Dwyer who is currently a postdoc at Maynooth University. We have a wide-ranging conversation about the digital commons, money, bitcoin and blockchain governance. We look at the historical origins of the commons, the role of money in human society, the problems with bitcoin and the creation of blockchain governance systems.  You can download the podcast at this link. You can also listen below, or subscribe on Stitcher and iTunes (via RSS feed - just click add to iTunes). Show Notes0:00 - 0:40 - Introduction0:40 - 9:00 - The history of the digital commons9:00 - 17:20 - What is money? What role does it play in society?17:20 - 29:20 - The value of transactional data and how it gets tracked29:20 - 34:25 - The centralisation of transactional data tracking and its role in algorithmic governance34:25 - 37:50 - Resisting transactional data-tracking37:50 - 46:00 - What is bitcoin? What is a cryptocurrency?46:00 - 54:25 - Can bitcoin be a currency of the digital commons?54:25 - 1:04:47 - The promise of blockchain governance: smart contracts and smart property1:04:47 - End - Criticisms of blockchain governance - the creation of an ultra-neo-liberal governance subject?  Relevant Links:Rachel's Academia.edu pageRachel on TwitterRachel's profile on the OpenHere webpageInterference journal (founded by Rachel)'The Revolution Will Not be Decentralised: Blockchain-based Technologies and the Commons' - by Rachel O'Dwyer'Other Values: Considering Digital Currency as Commons' - by Rachel O'Dwyer'The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain' - by James BoyleWhere's George? - physical currency tracking website'Blockchains, Smart Contracts and Smart Property'- by John Danaher'Blockchains, DAOs and the Modern Leviathan' - by John Danaher'Blockchains and the Emergence of a Lex Cryptographia' - by John Danaher'Distributed Ledger Technology: Beyond the Blockchain' - UK Gov Science Advisor