Similar to previous readings, the Mackenzie reading, Introduction: Softwarily, made me think about software and code in new ways. One idea I found particularly engaging was that of attaching agency to software. He starts off by pointing out there is a difference between an AI’s capacity for “full-blown” agency and the more widely recognized secondary-agency that most software possess. I’m surprised Mackenzie didn’t go into detail on the agency of AI; especially in light of the questions he raises at the end that section. I would like it if we discussed in class whether or not software like that in an elevator or street-light truly possesses any agency. Should agency be attributed to the programmer for outlining what a piece of software can do or to the software for actually performing the action? Is a conscious choice a prerequisite of agency? One could go in circles all day without clearer definitions of what is agency in the world of software.
The other reading, The Performativity of Code: Software and Cultures of Circulation, was mostly about the Linux kernel, its evolution, and the nature of its existence. Reading about where Linux came from and how it exists in cyberspace today was extremely interesting. It also brings some good questions to mind. For example, can Linux truly exist outside of the traditional sense that it is just code? The reading talked a lot about the many incarnations of Linux and it made me wonder if RadioFreeLinux truly qualified as another version of Linux. For me at least, the fact that it operates as code on a machine is central to its definition. It seemed to me that Mackenzie was suggesting that any incarnation of the code was equally valid as Linux. Like the other reading, I think this would make for an interesting discussion during class because one could go back and forth all day.
No comments:
Post a Comment