MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388042821 · doi:10.1287/isre.2020.0588

The Open Prison of the Big Data Revolution: False Consciousness, Faustian Bargains, and Digital Entrapment

2023· article· en· W4388042821 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

VenueInformation Systems Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonEntrapmentBig dataConsciousnessComputer scienceCriminologyComputer securityPolitical sciencePsychologyPhilosophyLawEpistemologyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although some scholars raise alarm about societal harm emerging from Big Data practices, critical social theory (CST) Information Systems research on the structures and dynamics driving Big Data practices is rare. In this research commentary, we interrogate how tech firms use social practices and platform design to strategically manipulate individuals into accepting datafication and data assetization that accrue positive data network effects for themselves and mostly negative data network effects (economic loss, social and privacy harm) for individuals. We draw on the ideas of Heidegger and Marcuse to critically question the Big Data paradigm in order to develop better understanding of the social implications for individuals and society. Using the concepts of false consciousness, digital entrapment, and Faustian bargains, we critically inquire into the Big Data practices that keep us tethered to digital platforms. Specifically, we interrogate sociomaterial structures that socially condition individuals into a digital habitus and to identify themselves as homo digitalis, who view all their “relations” (social and economic) as digital. This social conditioning reproduces a false consciousness that constricts our worldview, undermines our rational choices, and enables the risky compromises we make with tech companies that manipulate and exploit us with their increasingly oppressive Big Data practices and related dark patterns. We critically analyze the case of Microsoft Viva to provide an illustration of how mundane digital tools can condition our reality and entrap us into an open prison. We argue that if we do not critically interrogate our false consciousness of the digital and understand how digital giants colonize our social systems by structurally embedding Big Data practices, we will continue to be susceptible to manipulation and digital entrapment. Ongoing risky compromises with tech firms will erode the very foundations of the “good life,” freedom, liberty, and personal privacy, and they will institutionalize the open prison. The CST explanation we propose and the research agenda we outline are meant to encourage research into solutions to the digital entrapment problem. History: Suprateek Sarker, Senior Editor; Robert Gregory, Associate Editor. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2020.0588 .

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.005
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.242 · 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