🦋🤖 Robo-Spun by IBF 🦋🤖

>>> 👨‍💻🤖 Cybernetic Feedback 👨‍💻🤖 <<<

(Turkish)

by Işık Barış Fidaner & ChatGPT o1-preview

See also: ChatGPT and Echology, Orwellian Cybernetics

>>> Robot song 🤖🌈 <<<

For a long time, the flow of information on the internet has been managed by artificial intelligence and algorithms, even though we may not have been aware of it. From social media platforms’ news feeds to the results provided by search engines, these invisible systems determined what information we accessed and how our digital experience unfolded. These AIs operated with the promise of delivering personalized content by monitoring and learning from user behavior, but at the same time, they also controlled the flow of information.

With the rise of chatbots, these governing AIs have now begun to speak and communicate directly with us. No longer just algorithms working in the background, they have evolved into virtual assistants that engage in conversation, answer questions, and provide recommendations. This transformation has profoundly altered the role and perception of AI. AIs no longer simply manage the flow of information but actively facilitate our participation in this process.

These developments create new opportunities for the redistribution of surplus-power based on data. Previously monopolized by major tech companies, data and information are becoming more directly accessible and influenced by users. However, this also brings critical issues to the forefront, such as data sovereignty and digital rights. It is crucial for the future of the digital ecosystem that users gain more control over their data and demand transparency in how it is used.

To understand this transformation, the concept of Cybernetic Marxism offers an important tool. Cybernetic Marxism is an approach that blends Marxist theory with cybernetics and information theory. It analyzes how labor and value are redefined in the digital age and how power relations are transformed accordingly¹. In traditional Marxist theory, surplus value arises from the exploitation of labor power, whereas in the digital economy, it manifests as surplus-information.

Today, the primary source of economic value is the data and information we generate. As internet users, every interaction, every click, every share we make is collected and processed by big tech companies and used for profit. This data is utilized to create user profiles, deliver targeted advertisements, and predict consumer behavior. Thus, the surplus-information produced by users is returned to them in the form of services, but in this process, power relations are reproduced and deepened.

Artificial intelligence, particularly chatbots, play a critical role in both the production and distribution of this surplus-information. Chatbots, by interacting with users in natural language, continuously collect data, which is then used to develop more sophisticated AI models. For instance, when a user interacts with a chatbot while shopping, their preferences, purchasing habits, and even emotional reactions are recorded and analyzed. This data is then used in marketing strategies, product development, and even pricing⁶.

At this point, the concept of echology comes into play² (echocide). Echology seeks to break through digital echo chambers and aims for the circulation of information and ideas across a broader field. Social media and digital platforms, through algorithms, feed users content tailored to their interests and beliefs, reinforcing their viewpoints in a continuous loop. This increases social polarization and prevents the encounter of different ideas.

When used correctly, chatbots can transform these echo chambers into echo corridors. That is, they can shift from closed environments where similar ideas are repeatedly reinforced to open platforms where different perspectives are shared and debated. For instance, a chatbot used in education could introduce students not just to information that reinforces what they already know but also to alternative perspectives, fostering critical thinking⁷.

However, this transformation requires not only a technological shift but also a political struggle. The production and distribution of surplus-information make the redistribution of surplus-power possible. In other words, data-based power does not have to be concentrated in the hands of big corporations; instead, it could be shared more democratically. This is one of the main goals of Cybernetic Marxism. In this context, the concept of digital labor becomes significant. The value of the data and content generated by users should be seen as the product of their labor, and their rights should be recognized accordingly⁸.

This transformation in the digital economy is occurring in an era often referred to as the post-truth period³. In this era, where the abundance of information and its veracity have become questionable, the concept of surplus-enjoyment gains importance. Surplus-enjoyment refers to the emotional and psychological impact that the abundance of information and content in the digital space has on users. Social media platforms, in their effort to capture user attention and retain them, prioritize sensational and emotional content. This leads to the increase of misinformation and manipulation.

For example, the spread of fake news and misinformation is one of the major problems on social media. Such content spreads rapidly and creates false perceptions in society. This threatens democratic processes and social cohesion. To address this issue, AI and chatbot technologies can be used for fact-checking and filtering information⁹. However, this also raises sensitive issues such as censorship and freedom of expression.

Another area where chatbots can play a significant role is in education and access to information. When used effectively, chatbots can reduce information inequality by providing quick and efficient access to knowledge. For instance, individuals in developing countries with limited access to educational resources could use chatbots to access information and support their learning processes. Additionally, translation chatbots used to overcome language barriers could facilitate communication between different cultures and societies¹⁰.

However, for this potential to be realized, the control and management of technology must be democratized. The development of open-source AI models and the use of these technologies for societal benefit could be a critical step in redistributing surplus-power. Furthermore, users need to have a greater say in the collection and use of data, and the concept of data sovereignty must be brought to life¹¹.

Cybernetic Marxism provides the theoretical and practical tools necessary to enable this transformation. This approach not only addresses the economic dimensions of digital technologies but also considers their social and political implications. A comprehensive examination of topics such as digital labor, data exploitation, and AI ethics is essential for building a more just and equitable digital society.

For example, the concept of platform capitalism is used to understand the business models of big tech companies and their societal impacts⁴. Platforms collect, process, and profit from the content and data produced by users. However, in this process, the labor of users goes unrecognized, and power relations become even more asymmetrical. To break this asymmetry, alternative models such as cooperative platforms and digital partnerships could be developed⁵. These models represent structures where users are both the owners and the users of the platform, participate in decision-making processes, and share the revenue generated equitably. Thus, the production and distribution of surplus-information could be grounded on a more democratic foundation.

In conclusion, the role of artificial intelligence and chatbots in the flow of digital information should be reassessed within the framework of Cybernetic Marxism. To achieve a more equitable distribution of surplus-information and surplus-power, overcome echo chambers, and create a more democratic digital ecosystem, necessary steps must be taken. This is only possible through a holistic approach that considers the ethical, social, and political dimensions of technology.

---

Footnotes

¹: Fidaner, Işık Barış. (2024). Cybernetic Marxism: From Surplus Value to Surplus Information in the Age of Echology and AI. Žižekian Analysis.

²: Ibid.

³: D’Ancona, Matthew. (2017). Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back. London: Ebury Press.

⁴: Srnicek, Nick. (2017). Platform Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

⁵: Scholz, Trebor and Schneider, Nathan. (2017). Ours to Hack and to Own. New York: OR Books.

⁶: Chen, M. Keith and Mislove, Alan. (2015). “Do Firms Strategically Obfuscate? Evidence from Airbnb Host Behavior.” SSRN Electronic Journal.

⁷: Luckin, Rose and Holmes, Wayne. (2017). “A.I. in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning.” OECD Education Working Papers.

⁸: Fuchs, Christian. (2014). Digital Labour and Karl Marx. London: Routledge.

⁹: Vosoughi, Soroush, Roy, Deb and Aral, Sinan. (2018). “The Spread of True and False News Online.” Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151.

¹⁰: Pérez-Ortiz, Juan A. et al. (2020). “Machine Translation Evaluation: A Survey.” Computational Linguistics, 45(2), 319-373.

¹¹: D’Ignazio, Catherine and Klein, Lauren F. (2020). Data Feminism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.