MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Chimera Reified: Design, Meaning and the Post-consumerism Object

2010· article· en· W2020169686 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stuart Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Design Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConsumerismSociologySustainabilityMeaning (existential)Object (grammar)Goods and servicesSustainable designIndustrial designProduct (mathematics)Engineering ethicsEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyComputer scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceLawEconomicsEcologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design and production of short-lived electronic consumer goods are not only creating enormous environmental and social damage, their very transience indicates that, as objects, they possess little enduring value. This paper considers the design of these goods within contemporary society and suggests a direction that is more consistent not only with the priorities of sustainability but also with more profound understandings of meaning. A brief overview of electronic products is given in terms of their instrumental, social and positional attributes, along with some of their social and environmental consequences, and a simple conceptual ‘post-consumerism’ electronic object is presented that encapsulates various aspects of contemporary critique. This is followed by a consideration of the meanings of contemporary electronic goods, and the changes needed in our approaches to design, production and disposal to address concerns linked to deeper notions of human purpose. Based on this examination, which draws upon philosophical and environmental critiques of technology, new priorities for design practice are developed that are in accord with theoretical arguments for comprehensive reform of design and manufacturing. The potential implications for electronic goods are demonstrated through a second conceptual object.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.077
Scholarly communication0.0130.012
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Design JournalSame topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207