Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the posthuman era, what counts as ethical has dispersed and re-distributed to a nonhuman-centered network that includes nonhuman species and nonliving matter. This hybrid study consists of research and project-based speculative design that aims to recalibrate human relationships with others, in this case, digital fish. The overarching question in this research is: How a human-nonhuman relationship could look like through the lens of Taoist-posthumanism and how to design such a relationship? More specifically, how to design a mutually beneficial interactive system with limited human-initiated interaction? Firstly, I draw on Posthumanism, Taoism, and Contractualism as theoretical frameworks to form the arguments regarding the human-fish relationship. Second, I analyze the theories and transcribe them into the public interactive project Not-my-fish in terms of un-interactive interaction and human experience. Third, I apply the concept of flow as design guidelines and feature four aspects of the flow in the human-fish interaction: ecological flow, sensory flow, social flow, and data flow. Fourth, I discuss how the participating parties mutually benefit from this partnership. Not-my-fish rearticulates the relationship between humans and fish as well as humans and computers and sees the human-fish relationships from posthuman and Taoist perspectives. In short, although the transition from human-centered to posthuman interactive media creates some challenges for human partners and design aspects, the project demonstrates a practical way for humans to develop a posthuman design in public interactives and serve the public good at the same time.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".