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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article analyses work on click farm platforms in Brazil and Colombia. It argues that work on these platforms updates and renews the historical informality of work in Latin America. Drawing on click farm ethnography, worker interviews and digital ethnography on WhatsApp and Facebook groups and Youtube channels, the research highlights: first, the cultural marks of Brazil and Colombia in the interactions between workers, typical of Latin American digital culture; second, the role of Youtubers as skill makers, responsible for the initiation of workers into click farm platforms and the circulation of neoliberal and entrepreneurial ideology; third, practices and discourses relating to reselling accounts, photos and bots as a new version of the historical resale markets in the region; and fourth, the boundaries between informality and illegality at work on click farm platforms. The article argues that, in addition to informal work that preceded and is connected to work on click farms, informality gains new dimensions with work on click farms, with the platformisation of labour representing an articulation between the old informality and new market practices and infrastructures.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it