On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 06:32 AM, Ben Seattle wrote: > > The world did not even have the *internet* then.
Hell, the world did not even have *radio*. I really appreciate the thought and effort that went into this comment and your graphics, Ben. I agree with much of what you say. As I was reading, it dawned on me that much of our "education" impels us to ask while we are reading, "how can I *disagree* with what this person is saying?" Criticism being the banner of profundity. This is not to disavow criticism that flows from close attention and listening. You wrote, "Marx did not move things forward by asking "what did Marx say?" Lenin did not advance matters by asking "what did Lenin do?" They looked at the world and the organizational needs of the working class concretely." I would add that the world they looked at contained things said by many other people. The first step of his " ruthless criticism of all that exists" was to "develop new principles for the world out of the world’s own principles." With reference to your graphics, I was curious about "democratic algorithms." The term led me to a book with that title by Nikolaus Poechhacker. Are you familiar with his work? It is available for download here ( https://mediarep.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/865c226c-9880-400e-9066-3aa87383409c/content ). I haven't had time to read it yet. Here is the first paragraph of the introduction: > > This is a book about social order. More specifically, it is about the > complicated relationship between machine learning algorithms and the > formation of democratic order. And there are good reasons for such a book. > Algorithms appear to become a defining moment in the digitized societies > of the 21st century – and it seems that no domain of life is spared from > the rational and seemingly powerful influence of the computational logic > of algorithms. At least this is how the “alluring and compelling drama” > (Neyland 2016, 51) is being told. And it seems true. Filter bubbles > threaten democratic discourse and opinion formation, algorithmic risk > scores are being applied in law enforcement and judicial reasoning, and > policy is increasingly based on algorithmic evidence. Algorithms > specifically, and digital technologies in general, have become deeply > embedded in our social life, in contemporary societies, and in the > institutions of our democracies (Berg and Hofmann 2021). This fact even > provoked the question, whether democracy will survive the rise of AI > (Helbing et al. 2017). > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#39716): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/39716 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/116549413/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
