MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057402619 · doi:10.1521/siso.2013.77.2.202

The Place of Free and Open Source Software in the Social Apparatus of Accumulation

2013· article· en· W2057402619 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience & Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Economy and Work Transformation
Canadian institutionsHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapitalismCapital (architecture)ReproductionSocial reproductionProduction (economics)Neoclassical economicsCharacter (mathematics)EconomicsLabour economicsSociologySocial capitalMicroeconomicsLawSocial sciencePolitical scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The immateriality of both commodities and labor, which is increasingly characteristic of contemporary capitalism at its hi-tech centers, has complicated drawing a hard distinction between productive and unproductive forms of labor. Drawing an overly technical distinction between these two categories of labor potentially overlooks some important aspects of the processes of capitalist reproduction, particularly the increasingly social character of labor, and as such, a broader definition must be considered. The labor engaged in the production of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) is illustrative of this need for further examination of the productive-unproductive distinction, for the fact that though FOSS, in some respects, appears tendentially anti-capitalist, in fact, it, and the immaterial labor driving it, has essentially been fully subsumed in the apparatus of capital accumulation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.289 · 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