Reclaiming the Ambient Commons: Strategies of Depletion Design in the Subjective Economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vision of an internet of things, increasingly considered in the context of the “internet of everything”, calls for an ethics of technology driven less by the philosophical search for the essence of technology than by a transversal curiosity regarding processes of constitution. If growing interest in enhanced and expanded media literacy approaches facilitates ethical reflection, the scope of such reflection is related to the extent of our attention to and awareness of the immanence of our agency, our capacity for relation in machinic assemblages that structure and sustain our communicative existences far beyond the sphere of signification. While the positions from which such reflection occurs are necessarily multiple, we can still respond to the distribution of agency with an aggregation of responsibility and the creation of a commons with greater attention to the vastness of the spatial and temporal scales of our situation. The idea of depletion design is both a concrete set of design strategies and an attempt to establish an experimental institutional object to facilitate and frame such ethico-aesthetic practice, an architecture for commoning that situates and affirms our ethical agency under the conditions of mediation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".