Singularium

SINGUL ARIUM

SYLVIA ECKERMANN

SINGUL ARIUM Die Einzigartigkeit und Unverwechselbarkeit des Individuums ist nicht mehr nur Behauptung. Sie wird gemessen und evaluiert. Die Messung erzeugt das Gemessene. Das durch digitale Methoden vermessene Individuum wird unter der Datenlupe modifiziert. Aus Zahlen werden Normen, aus Maßen werden Maßstäbe.

Durch diese „Reduktion der Komplexität“ (Niklas Luhmann) ordnen Zahlen unsere Welt. Vom Ordnen zum Bewerten ist nur ein kleiner Schritt. Die Bewegung unserer Körper, Handlungen und Gefühle, sowie unser Kapital stehen unter dauerhafter Beobachtung. Wir befinden uns in einem gewaltigen Feedback-Loop, gespeist aus den Daten unseres eigenen Verhaltens.

Das Kollektiv der Datengeber sind die Berechneten die nicht zurückrechnen können – sie werden durchschaut und können nicht zurückschauen. Diese Intransparenz ist Ausdruck der Macht, nicht des Wesens der Algorithmen.

In diesem Spannungsfeld bewegt sich SINGULARIUM – ein invertierter Kristall als Blackbox, in den die Besucherin eintaucht. In der Begegnung mit dem eigenen Fremdbild erfährt sie, distanziert und fragmentarisch, eine „Realität die unwahrscheinlich ist“ (Elena Esposito), sich aber dennoch konkretisiert.

SYLVIA ECKERMANN

SINGUL ARIUM The uniqueness and singularity of the individual is no longer just a claim. It is measured and evaluated. The measurement creates the measured. The individual measured through digital methods is modified under the data loupe. Numbers become norms, measurements become standards. Through this “reduction of complexity” (Niklas Luhmann) numbers order our world. It is only a small step from ordering to evaluation. The movement of our bodies, behaviours and feelings, and our capital are subject to permanent observation. We find ourselves in a colossal feedback loop fed by data about our own behaviour. The collective of the data suppliers are the counted who cannot count back – they are seen through but cannot look back. This lack of transparency is an expression of the power, not of the nature of the algorithms.

SINGULARIUM investigates this territory – an inverted crystal as a black box that immerses the visitors. In the encounter with their own external image, they experience, distanced and fragmentary, a “reality that is improbable” (Elena Esposito) yet becomes more concrete.

Thomas Raab

Data driven narcissism

1.

Alan Turing adopted a pragmatic view of intelligence. If one cannot tell a behavioral (e.g., linguistic) difference between the results of human vs. machine intelligence, the latter finally has been achieved by definition.

2.

In a similar vain social, today’s web macroentrepreneurs simply define intelligence as giving “right” responses. The computation of these responses is best be achieved by machine “learning” and massive “big data” statistics.

3.

Yet, introspective research shows that human intelligence functions entirely different. Its kernel is the creative construction of deterministically predicting models of, albeit subjectively carved out, domains in the world. However well a statistical prediction, it can in principle never provide a theory of man. But of course it can exterminate psychology.

4.

As is also true for many older technologies, big data statistics “reverse-engineers” the demands of the people who use their outcomes. It mirrors not only taste preferences but also memories we may have long hoped to forget. By thus constraining the input to our “selves” they further constrict our behavior repertoire thereby improving our predictability still further.

5.

We may thus become the uncreative drones , the Web 2.0 protagonists already conceive us to be. Like a self-fulfilling prophecy statistical behavior prediction will produce the objects it already describes.

6.

And yet, although our predictability will be maximized, so will our sense of individuality , because computing the combination of “character items” mirrored back on us will effectively single each of us out for control and consumer purposes.

7.

Let us further assume that a society consisting of such drones is stable because it only needs technical and administrative engineers. We live in our narcissistic data suits feeling free and happy. The ultimate question will then be: Is such a social end state heaven – or is it hell?

Sources: Thomas Raab

Data Driven Narcissism: How Will “Big Data” Feed Back on Us? 2015, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 22 (9-10), 215-228.

Die Netzwerk-Orange (The Network Orange, a SF novel).

2015, Wien: Luftschacht.

You worry about things. You make friends easily. You have a vivid imagination. You trust others. You complete tasks successfully. You get angry easily. You love large parties. You believe in the importance of art. You would never cheat on your taxes. You like order. You often feel blue. You take charge. You experience your emotions intensely. You make people feel welcome. You try to follow the rules. You are easily intimidated. You are always busy. You prefer variety to routine. You are easy to satisfy. You go straight for the goal. You often eat too much. You love excitement. You like to solve complex problems. You dislike being the centre of attention. You get chores done right away. You panic easily.

You radiate joy. You tend to vote for liberal political candidates. You sympathize with the homeless. You avoid mistakes.

You fear for the worst. You warm up quickly to others. You enjoy wild flights of fantasy. You believe that others have good intentions. You excel in what you do. You get irritated easily. You talk to a lot to different people at parties. You like music. You stick to the rules. You like to tidy up. You dislike yourself! You try to lead others. You feel others’ emotions.

You anticipate the needs of others. You keep your promises. You are afraid that you will do the wrong thing. You are always on the go. You like to visit new places. You can’t stand confrontations. You work hard. You don’t know why you do some of the things you do. You seek adventure. You love to read challenging material. You dislike talking about yourself. You are always prepared. You become overwhelmed by events. You have a lot of fun. You believe that there is no absolute right or wrong. You feel sympathy for those who are worse off than yourself. You are afraid of many things. You feel comfortable around people. You love to daydream. You trust what people say. You handle tasks smoothly. You get upset easily. You enjoy being part of a group. You see beauty in things that others might not notice. You use flattery to get ahead. You want everything to be just right. You are often down in the dumps. You can talk others into doing things. You are passionate about causes. You love to help others. You pay bills on time. You find it difficult to approach others. You do a lot in your spare time. You are interested in many things. You hate to seem pushy. You turn plans into actions. You do things you later regret. You love action. You have a rich vocabulary.

You consider yourself an average person. You start tasks right away. You feel that you are unable to deal with things.

You express childlike joy. You believe that criminals should receive help rather than punishment. You value cooperation over competition. You stick to the chosen path. You get stressed out easily. You act comfortably with others. You like to get lost in thought. You believe that people are basically moral. You are sure of your ground. You are often in a bad mood. You involve others in what you are doing. You love flowers. You use others for your own ends. You love order and regularity. You have a low opinion of yourself. You seek to influence others. You enjoy examining yourself and your life. You are concerned about others. You tell the truth. You are afraid to draw attention to yourself. You can manage many things at the same time. You like to begin new things. You have a sharp tongue.

You plunge into tasks with all your heart. You go on binges. You enjoy being part of a loud crowd. You can handle a lot of information. You seldom toot your own horn. You get to work at once. You can‘t make up your mind. You believe in one true religion. You suffer from others‘ sorrows. You jump into things without thinking. You get caught up in your problems. You cheer people up. You indulge in fantasies. You believe in human goodness. You come up with good solutions. You lose temper. You love surprise parties. You enjoy the beauty of nature. You know how to get around the rules. You do things according to a plan. You have frequent mood swings. You take control of things. You try to understand yourself. You have a good word for everyone. You listen to your conscience. You only feel comfortable with friends. You react quickly. You prefer to stick with known things. You contradict others. You do more than what’s expected of you. You love to eat. You enjoy being reckless. You enjoy thinking about things. You believe that you are better than others. You get overwhelmed by emotions. You love life. You tend to vote for conservative political candidates. You are not interested in other people’s problems. You make rash decisions. You are not easily bothered by things. You are hard to get to know. You spend time reflecting on things. You think that all will be well. You know

how to get things done. You rarely get irritated. You prefer to be alone. You do not like art. You cheat to get ahead.

You often forget to put things back in their proper place. You feel desperate. You wait for others to lead the way. You seldom get emotional. look down on others. You break rules. You stumble over your words. You like to take it easy. You dislike changes. You love a good fight. You set high standards for yourself and others. You rarely overindulge. You act wild and crazy. You are not interested in abstract ideas. You think highly of yourself. You find it difficult to get down to work. You remain calm under pressure. You look at the bright side of life. You believe that too much tax money goes to support artists. You tend to dislike soft- hearted people. You like to act on a whim. You are relaxed most of the time. You often feel uncomfortable around others. You seldom daydream. You distrust people. You misjudge situations. You seldom get mad. You want to be left alone. You do not like poetry. You put people under pressure. You leave a mess in your room. You feel that your life lacks direction. You keep in the background. You are not easily affected by emotions. You are indifferent to the feelings of others. You break promises. You are not embarrassed easily.

You like to take your time. You don’t like the idea of change. You yell at people. You demand quality. You easily resist temptations. You are willing to try anything once. You avoid philosophical discussions. You have a high opinion of yourself. You waste your time. You can handle complex problems. You laugh aloud. You believe laws should be strictly enforced. You believe in an eye for an eye. You rush into things. You are not easily disturbed by events. You avoid contacts with others. You do not have a good imagination. You suspect hidden motives in others. You don’t understand things. You are not easily annoyed. You don’t like crowded events. You do not enjoy going to art museums. You pretend to be concerned for others. You leave belongings around. You seldom feel blue. You have little to say. You rarely notice your emotional reactions. You make people feel uncomfortable. You get others to do your duties. You are comfortable in unfamiliar situations. You like a leisurely lifestyle. You are a creature of habit. You insult people. You are not highly motivated to succeed. You are able to control your cravings. You seek danger. You have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. You know the answers to many questions. You need a push to get started. You know how to cope. You amuse friends. You believe that we coddle criminals too much. You try not to think about the needy.

You do crazy things. You don’t worry about things that have already happened. You are not really interested in others. You seldom get lost in thought. You are wary of others. You have little to contribute. You keep your cool. You avoid crowds. You do not like concerts. You take advantage of others. You are not bothered by messy people. You feel comfortable with yourself. You don’t like to draw attention to yourself. You experience very few emotional highs and lows. You turn your back on others. You do the opposite of what is asked. You are not bothered by difficult social situations. You let things proceed at their own pace. You dislike new foods. You get back at others. You do just enough work to get by. You never spend more than you can afford. You would never go hang gliding or bungee jumping.

You are not interested in theoretical discussions. You boast about your virtues. You have difficulty starting tasks. You readily overcome setbacks. You are not easily amused. You believe that we should be tough on crime. You believe people should fend for themselves. You act without thinking. You adapt easily to new situations. You keep others at a distance. You have difficulty imagining things. You believe that people are essentially evil. You don’t see the consequences of things. You rarely complain. You seek quiet. You do not enjoy watching dance performances. You obstruct others’ plans. You are not bothered by disorder. You are very pleased with yourself. You hold back your opinions. You don’t understand people who get emotional. You take no time for others. You misrepresent the facts. You are able to stand up for yourself. You react slowly. You are attached to conventional ways. You hold a grudge. You put little time and effort into work. You never splurge. You dislike loud music. You avoid difficult reading material. You make yourself the centre of attention. You postpone decisions. You are calm even in tense situations. You seldom joke around. You like to stand during the national anthem. You can’t stand weak people. You often make last-minute plans.

Gerald Raunig

NO FUTURE. Dividuelle Linien, neue AkteurInnen der Kreativität „Der Zukunft verfallen“ seien die, „die sich bei den Wahrsagern Auskunft holen“ – so das Bild von der Zukunft in den letzten Zeilen, die von Walter Benjamin erhalten sind. Wahrsager, das sind jene, die die zweifelhafte Kunst beherrschen, eine Linie in die Zukunft zu ziehen, sich von der Linie in die Zukunft ziehen zu lassen. Heute sind die Wahrsager leader und trader, und ihre Zukunft nennt sich futures.

Die Messlatten wollen immer weiter ins Unmessbare reichen. Nicht nur das Messbare soll gemessen, sondern möglichst viel Unmessbares in den Bereich des Messbaren verschoben werden. Das ist das unendliche Begehren der modulierenden Datensammlung von Amazon bis zur NSA: riesige Akkumulationen von dividuellen Datensätzen, die auf unendliche Arten geteilt, wieder zusammen- und inwertgesetzt werden können; nicht nur um die Kontrolle über die vermessenen und messbaren Territorien zu halten, sondern um einzudringen in unkontrollierte, bisher nicht begehrte Gefilde, diese möglichst genau und allumfassend zu vermessen; Videos, die bis jetzt niemanden interessierten, Internetlinks, die noch nie angeklickt wurden, zukünftige weiße Flecken im realen und virtuellen Raum.

Einfangen der Zukunft, um damit die Gegenwart zu kolonisieren.

Am Anfang stand das Fließband. Und es ist das Fließband, auf Englisch assembly line, aus dem Stefano Harney in seinem Text Algorithmische Institutionen und der Logistische Kapitalismus1 seine zentrale Begrifflichkeit der line entwickelt. Entlang „der Linie“ tauchen ArbeiterInnen und Maschinen auf, indem sie die Linie „machen“. Damit fügt sich ein komplexeres Puzzle, als die Perspektive nur auf Maschinen, nur auf ArbeiterInnen oder auch nur auf das einseitige Verhältnis des Menschen zur Maschine es erlauben würde. Es ist das maschinische Verhältnis von Menschen, Maschinen und allen anderen Komponenten zur Linie und ihrer Bewegung, das zählt. All

diese Komponenten ziehen die Linie und werden von ihr gezogen, für die kontinuierliche Bearbeitung und Verbesserung des Prozesses in Dienst genommen, nicht auf ein statisches Produkt hin, sondern auf die unaufhörliche Optimierung der Linie.

Die einstige Konzentration auf das individuelle Produkt der assembly line, auf dessen Effizienz und Qualität, wird abgelöst durch eine andere Linie, die in Spiralen und Feedbackschleifen verläuft, deren frühere Linearität und Gerichtetheit neu gedacht werden muss: als eine nunmehr potenziell endlose, alineare Linie, eine Linie, die in alle Richtungen geht, springt und unterschiedliche Dinge durchquert, eine dividuelle Linie, die sammelt, ansammelt, versammelt, nicht mehr assembly line, sondern line of assembly.

Arbeiten auf/in/an/entlang der Linie impliziert in der mehrdeutigen Formulierung „work on the line“ mehrerlei. „On the line“ zu arbeiten bedeutet zunächst eine gewisse Gefährdung, einen prekären Status, einen ständigen Balanceakt. Es spielt aber auch auf die digitale Vernetzung der Online-Arbeit an, auf die ihr immanente Wunschproduktion und auf die Zerstreuung der Produktion. Und wenn die Fantasie der Logistik die Menschen zunehmend als auszuschaltenden Faktor sieht, bedeutet das keineswegs, dass maschinischer Kapitalismus ohne Menschen funktioniert. Die Linie impliziert auch das erweiterte Fließband der fabbrica sociale, wie es die postoperaistische Theorie formuliert hat, der „sozialen Fabrik“, die sich zugleich als das verbindende Band einer dienstbar gewordenen Kooperation installiert hat.

Innerhalb der Unternehmen verweist die line auch auf eine vertikale Linie, vor allem im Begriff der line managers, der Linienvorgesetzten. Die Linienvorgesetzten haben, wie Stefano Harney schreibt, in „algorithmischen Institutionen“ hauptsächlich die Funktion, die algorithmische Metrik zu bedienen. Selbst wenn das Wort Strategie an allen Ecken und Enden in den Unternehmen auftaucht, ist es in seiner Bedeutung des strategischen Handelns von Linien vorgesetzten völlig ausgehöhlt. Statt wie früher

strategisch vorzugehen, besteht die Aufgabe des Managements nun darin, die Fehleranfälligkeit und Langsamkeit menschlicher Entscheidung in der Führung möglichst zu vermeiden. Linienvorgesetzte wissen buchstäblich nicht, was sie tun. Sie versuchen, die Linie in Bewegung zu halten, am Ende nur noch, sie zu exekutieren, um die algorithmische Institution nicht zu stören: „Typischerweise wendet eine solche Institution die algorithmische Metrik bis zu dem Punkt an, dass die Linienvorgesetzten völlig deskilled sind und nur mehr als Vollstreckungsorgane und Polizei in der Institution agieren können. Sie geben keine Richtungen vor und haben keine Erklärung für die Richtung, die die Organisation nimmt. Sie sind konsequenter- und typischerweise defensiv, mobbend, unsicher und darauf beschränkt, Losungen der Institutionsleitung wiederzugeben. Sie scheinen mit Mikromanagement beschäftigt, in Wahrheit hat die Metrik von ihnen Besitz ergriffen und operiert durch sie.“2 Das Unverständnis all dessen, was hier top-down zu vermitteln ist, geht zusammen mit vertikaler Dienstfertigkeit, deskilling mit hilflosem Polizeigehabe. Derweil üben sich, zumindest in der Fantasie von Operations Management und Unternehmensleitungen, die Algorithmen im Selbstmanagement, Nachfahren des Marx’schen automatischen Subjekts. Es bleibt nur noch eine Aufgabe für das Management, alt und neu zugleich: Die Linienvorgesetzten sind hauptsächlich damit beschäftigt, die algorithmische Selbstorganisation vor dem Widerstand der ArbeiterInnen zu beschützen.

Der gefügige Charakter ist dafür gemacht, das gesamte Gefüge gefügig zu halten.

On the line zu arbeiten bedeutet auch, an der Linie selbst zu arbeiten, sie ständig zu verbessern, zu erweitern, ihr etwas hinzuzufügen, bis dahin, „eine neue Linie vorzugeben“. Das ist dann auch die neue Funktion des leitenden Managements, der Bosse, die keine ManagerInnen sind, sondern leaders. Aufgrund seiner Komplexität können sie das Unternehmen nicht mehr befehligen. Eine Linie vorgeben heißt nun die Linie interpretieren, sie erzählen wie eine Geschichte. Der Linie folgen, sie im Folgen verstehen

und im Verstehen erzählen, sie nach/zeichnen mit jeder neuen Wendung, mit jedem plötzlichen Bruch, mit jedem unerwarteten Sprung. Führen heißt in dieser paradoxen Logik: der Linie folgen.

Schließlich ist die Linie auch jene abstrakt-dividuelle Linie, die viele Einzeldinge durchquert. Sie verbindet nicht nur die soziale Fabrik als neues Fließband, sie sammelt, bündelt auch die zusammenpassenden Teile von verschiedenen Einzeldingen, um aus dieser Neuanordnung Mehrwert zu schlagen. Randy Martin schreibt in seinem wunderbaren, posthum im Sommer 2015 erschienenen Buch Knowledge Ltd über diese Umkehrung des klassischen Produktionsprozesses: „Während das massenhafte Fließband all seine Inputs an einem Platz versammelte, um eine straff integrierte Ware zu erzeugen, die mehr war als die Summe ihrer Teile, spulte das financial engineering diesen Prozess verkehrt ab, indem es eine Ware in ihre konstituierenden und veränderlichen Elemente zerlegte und diese Attribute zerstreute, um sie zusammen mit den Elementen anderer Waren zu bündeln, die für einen global orientierten Markt für risikogesteuerten Austausch interessant sind. Alle diese beweglichen Teile werden mit ihrem Risiko-Attribut wieder zusammengesetzt, sodass sie als Derivat mehr wert werden als ihre individuellen Waren.“3 Diese dividuelle Logik der Derivate gibt sich nicht mehr zufrieden mit ökonomischen Diagrammen und Flüssen, mit Kalkulation und Voraussagen, mit Repräsentationen der Zukunft, die der Aktion der ManagerInnen vorausgehen. Sie will, wie Stefano Harney und Fred Moten in The Undercommons schreiben, nicht nur den Warenfluss von menschlicher Zeit und menschlichem Irrtum bereinigen, sondern im Konkreten selbst leben, im Raum zugleich, in der Zeit zugleich, in der Form zugleich.4 Mathematische Modelle berechnen in diesem Run auf das Konkrete nicht mehr einfach Risiken, um sie zu kontrollieren und zu minimieren, sondern spielen geradezu mit immer größeren Risiken. Sie sollen in die Zukunft sehen, futures hervorbringen, doch ihr verstecktes Ziel ist es, die Jetzt-Zeit gefügig zu machen.

Die Algorithmen sind immer auf der Jagd nach dem, was außerhalb ihres Territoriums und dessen Un/Wahrscheinlichkeiten liegt, geradezu definiert durch das, was sie noch nicht sind und was sie möglicherweise nie werden können. Und mit ihnen jagen die trader, wenn sie gleichsam aus dem Nichts heraus Derivatverträge schaffen, schreiben, unter/zeichnen.

Ihre Kreativität ist das Nicht-Wissen der Zukunft, das Markt geworden ist.

Der menschliche Faktor des maschinischen Kapitalismus zeigt sich im Schaffen des Ereignisses der Zeichnung: Die Arbeit der trader besteht im Schreiben und Zeichnen des Derivats als creatio ex nihilo. Das Bild der voraussetzungslosen Tabula rasa durchzieht ihre Fantasien, ihre Gegenwart ist eine leere Tafel.

Creatio ex nihilo, trader nicht nur in der Nachfolge von Wahrsagern, sondern auch von göttlichen Geniekünstlern. Und immer noch steht die Beziehung zur Zukunft im Zentrum. Auch wenn es eine Zukunft ohne Vorhersagen sein soll, scheinen die trader auf ihrer gehetzten Jagd nach der Zukunft auf die Gegenwart zu vergessen. Doch es verhält sich genau umgekehrt: Nicht die Kolonisierung der Zukunft steht am Spiel, sondern der Zugriff auf die Gegenwart als Jetzt-Zeit. Die Zukunft regiert die Gegenwart. Die vom Wahr sager- Künstler-trader erschaffene Zukunft bedroht die JetztZeit. Durch Kombinationen von Kalkulation und Vorhersage wird die Zukunft bestimmt, indem alles Unzählbare gezählt wird, alles Unmessbare messbar gemacht, jede Differenz und Unähnlichkeit angeglichen, um dann oder besser: zur gleichen Zeit unsere Gegenwart an diese nun bestimmte Zukunft anzupassen. Die leere Gegenwart der leader und trader projiziert eine Linie, eine Zukunft, um dadurch die ausgedehnte Gegenwart der JetztZeit zu beherrschen und auszulöschen. Kappung der dividuellen Linien in den sozialen Raum und in die Tiefe einer brüchigen Vergangenheit. Die leere Tafel der Wahrsagergegenwart erdrückt mit ihren Vorhersagen und Präventionen die geologische Ausdehnung der Jetzt-Zeit und den Tigersprung ins Vergangene.

Gegen die Vor/wegnahme der Zukunft in Form von futures bedarf es

der Affirmation dieser ausgedehnten Gegenwart, die sich im Werden und Vergehen einnistet und ausbreitet. Nicht der Zukunft und ihren Wahrsagern zu verfallen, heißt, die Gegenwart nicht zur leeren Tafel verkommen zu lassen. Und damit sind wir schließlich bei einer alten Bekannten angelangt, der schwachen messianischen Kraft von „God Save the Queen“ und dem wütenden, freudigen und affirmativen Slogan „No Future!“ der Sex Pistols von vor 40 Jahren. Keine Verschwendung von Begehren für eine bessere Zukunft, vielmehr „Dividualisierung“ des gegenwärtigen Werdens, des Hier und Jetzt, der Jetzt-Zeit, genau im und auf dem Immanenzfeld von Social Media und Algorithmen, Logistik und Derivate. Für diese Operationen gegen die visionären Wahrsager-Künstler-trader im Terrain des maschinischen Kapitalismus braucht es die ausgefunkte Macht des Postpunk, dividuelle Monster, antiutopische Ungefüge der Jetzt-Zeit.

Vortragstext für die Konferenz: Algorithmische Regime 2015, veranstaltet von: Institute for New Culture Technologies/ t0.

Gerald Raunig, DIVIDUUM. Maschinischer Kapitalismus und molekulare Revolution, Band 1 ist im Januar 2015 bei transversal texts erschienen.

Download unter http://transversal.at/books/dividuum.

1 Stefano Harney, Istituzioni algoritmiche e capitalismo logistico (aus dem Englischen von Matteo Pasquinelli), in: Matteo Pasquinelli (Hg.), Gli algoritmi del capitale. Accelerazionismo, macchine della conoscenza e autonomia del comune. Verona 2014, S. 116–129.

2 Ebd., S. 125f.

3 Randy Martin, Knowledge Ltd: Toward a Social Logic of the Derivative. Philadelphia 2015, S. 61.

4 Vgl. Stefano Harney/Fred Moten, The Undercommons. Fugitive Planning & Black Study. London 2013, S. 87–99. Die deutsche Version des Buchs erscheint im Januar 2016 bei transversal texts.

Gerald Raunig

NO FUTURE. Dividual Lines and New Agents of Creativity “Those who fell prey to the future, seek advice from the soothsayers”, wrote Walter Benjamin. One could adapt his writing today into: “Those who fell prey to the future, seek advice from brokers, economists, analysts, and traders.”

The reality of today’s dividual data sets, enormous accumulations of data that can be divided, recomposed and valorized in endless ways, is one of worldwide streams, of deterritorialization and of machinic expansion, most succinctly expressed as Big Data. Facebook needs the self-division of individual users just as intelligence agencies still hold on to individual identities. Big Data, dividual data on the other hand, is less interested in individuals and just as little interested in a totalization of data, but all the more in data sets that are freely floating and as detailed as possible, which it can dividually traverse – as an open field of immanence with a potentially endless extension. These enormous multitudes of data seem to form a horizon of knowledge that governs and spatializes the entire past and present through capturing the future.

The compliant character is receptive to machinic suggestions. Machinic control is expanding as far as it can: everything is suggested, wherever possible there are no more open, unmeasured search movements. Yet not even the boundary between the measurable and the immeasurable is stable. The measuring gauges seek to reach further and further into the immeasurable. Not only the measurable is to be measured, but also as much of the immeasurable as possible is to be shifted into the area of the measurable. That is the endless desire of the modulating mode of collecting data: to maintain control not only over the measured and measurable territories, but also to penetrate into uncontrolled realms not previously desired and to measure them as exactly and comprehensively as possible.

White spots in real and virtual spaces, videos that have not interested anyone before, internet links that have never been clicked on.

The algorithm sparks capital’s old fantasies of ending its dependency on living labor at last. If it is no longer managers, bankers, brokers, but rather programs that carry out calculations and computations and react to these kinds of calculations and computations, then it appears it is no longer humans operating with the programs, but rather the programs with the humans. It is not only that they subordinate themselves to the machines, that they become part of the machine like the workers in Marx’s machine fragment, but they are to be entirely swept away from the self-expanding fantasy of their screens. This is the image that Stefano Harney draws in his text “Algorithmic Institutions and Logistical Capitalism” of the inventive and simultaneously (suicidally) murderous effect of the algorithm. In the fantasy of logistics, things talk directly with things. Reduction of all machinic relations to thing-relationships, inversion of anthropocentrism: instead of human beings, things are essentialized.

Yet Harney also describes how, long before its expansion in finance, with the help of the algorithm, in the operations management of bodies, machines, instruments, trucks, warehouses and factories, our own hands, our own labor, our own desire allowed a world to emerge, that wanted to become a world without us. Operations management is the science and practice of the relationship between variable and constant capital in motion, in daily life perhaps even more influential and insidious than finance. The assembly line is the starting point for all the considerations of this once marginal area of management theory. And it is the assembly line, from which Harney also develops his central concept of the line. Workers and machines appear along “the line” by “making” the line. In this way, a more complex puzzle is put together than the perspective only on machines, on workers, or even the one-sided relation of the human to the machine. What counts is the machinic relation of humans, machines, and all the other components to the line and its motion. All these components draw the line and are drawn by it, taken into service for the continuous handling and im-

provement of the process, not for the sake of a static product, but rather for the incessant optimization of the line.

With logistics and containerization, concentrating on the product, on its efficiency and quality, is replaced by a line running in spirals and feedback loops, and its previous linearity and directedness must be rethought: now as an endless, a-linear line, a line going in all directions, a line that collects, accumulates, assembles, no longer an assembly line but a line of assembly.

Working on/in/along the line has multiple implications. Working on the line means, first of all, a certain danger, a constant balancing act. There is also an allusion to the digital networking of online work. And when the fantasy of logistics regards humans increasingly as a factor to be eliminated, this does not mean that machinic capitalism functions without humans. For the human components, “the line” implies the expanded assembly line, the fabbrica sociale, as postoperaist theory has formulated it, the “social factory”, which has simultaneously installed itself as the binding bond of a cooperation that has become servile.

Within the enterprise, the line also relates to a vertical line, primarily in the term of line managers. As Harney writes, the main function of the line managers of “algorithmic institutions” consists of servilely operating the algorithmic metrics. Even if the word strategy comes up in all corners of the enterprise, it has been completely hollowed out in its meaning of managers acting strategically. Instead of proceeding strategically, as in the past, the task of management now consists of avoiding as far as possible the error-proneness and slowness of human decisions. Managers literally do not know what they are doing. They try to keep the line in motion, in the end merely to execute it so as not to disrupt the algorithmic institution: “Typically such an institution has deployed algorithmic metrics to the point where line managers are entirely deskilled and can act only as enforcers and police within the institutions. They set no direction, and have no explanation for the direction the organisation takes. They are consequently and typically defensive, bullying, insecure, and reduced to mouthing phrases from the institution’s leader. They appear to be micro-managing but in

fact this is only the metrics possessing them and operating through them.�

Vertical servility conjoins with the lack of understanding of all that is to be conveyed from the top to the bottom, deskilling corresponds with policing behavior. Meanwhile, at least in the fantasy of operations management and the leaders of enterprises, the algorithms exercise self-management, successors to the Marxian automatic subject. Only one task remains for management, both old and new: the line managers are mostly concerned with protecting the algorithmic self-organization from the resistance of the workers. The compliant character is predestined to keep the entire assemblage compliant.

Now, working on the line also literally means working on the line itself, constantly improving and expanding it, appending something to it, all the way to the point of “setting a new line�. That is also the new function of the leading management, the bosses, who are not managers but leaders. Due to its complexity they can no longer command the enterprise. Setting a line now means interpreting the line, narrating it like a story. Following the line, understanding it in following and narrating it in understanding, they trace it, redraw it with each new turn, with each sudden break, with each unexpected leap. In this paradoxical logic, leading means following the line. The constant reforming and deforming of the line is the omnipresent foundation for working on it. If the line is continuously improved in every moment of the present, then its future is also to be determined. Metrics replaces measurement, the algorithm relies on a new relative, derived, derivative, metrical measurement that measures efficiency only to speculate with it.

The ongoing modulating and smoothing of the measurement, the incessant recalculation needs the complex logic of the algorithm. In this way, the line becomes a speculative line: not one that primarily has the value of a commodity, a business, a corporation in view, but rather the process and the speculation with the line itself. What the line becomes is the goal of all computations.

Lastly, the line is also the abstract-dividual line that traverses many single things. It connects not only the social factory as a new assembly

line, but it also collects, combines the parts of diverse single things that fit together to derive added value from this new arrangement. In his book Knowledge LTD, Randy Martin writes about this inversion of the classical production process: “The mass assembly line gathered all its inputs in one place to build a tightly integrated commodity that was more than the sum of its parts. Financial engineering played this process in reverse, disassembling a commodity into its constituent and variable elements and dispersing these attributes to be bundled together with the elements of other commodities of interest to a globally oriented market for risk-managed exchange. Each of these movable parts is reassembled by risk attribute so that they become worth more as derivatives than their individual commodities […].” Logistics is no longer content with economic diagrams and flows, with calculations and predictions, with representations that precede the action of the managers. It not only wants to purify the flow of goods from human time and human error, but to live in the concrete itself, in space at once, in time at once, in form at once.1 In this run on the concrete, mathematical calculations no longer simply calculate risks to control and minimize them, but instead play with ever greater risks. They are supposed to see into the future, produce futures, calculate probabilities based on currently achievable data. What is improbable can nevertheless occur, and then it is called “black swan”.2 At the same time, improbability is still within the framework of managing and exploiting risks, which now no longer apply solely to the subsistential risk of vulnerability, of precariousness, to put it with Judith Butler, but also to derivatives or secondary risks, which can arise in the collection and recombination of large masses of data, machinic-dividual risks.

Randy Martin writes: „While mathematical models are attributed with powers of seeing the future, in practice they operate in the moment of their available data streams. More, what they see in the present is what they take to be most likely to happen.”

At the same time, the algorithms are always in pursuit of what lies outside their territory and its im/probabilities, veritably defined by what they

not yet are and what they may possibly never become. And the traders of the Blank Swan 3 are in pursuit along with them, when they create, under/ write, draw derivative contracts virtually out of nothing: whereas black and white swans are based on probabilities, the blank swan is the animal of the unknowable, what is outside the realm of every probability calculation. The blank swan is the non-knowledge of the future, which has become the market. The human factor of machinic capitalism, in this perspective, consists in creating the event of drawing/writing: the work of the traders consists in writing and drawing the derivative as a creatio ex nihilo. The image of the preconditionless tabula rasa permeates their fantasies. Without prior knowledge, foresight or predictions, they transport themselves, according to Ayache, into the future. And the relationship to the future is still at the center. Even though it is supposed to be a future without predictions, the traders in hot pursuit of the future forget about the present. Just like the white swan and the black swan, the blank swan remains, in the logic of algorithmics and logistics, always in pursuit of what it is not. Creatio ex nihilo, traders not only as followups of soothsayers, but also of genius artists. At the same time this means not just the colonization of our future by today’s soothsayers, but a brutal future of algorithms colonizing our past and our present.

Future rules the present time. This future created by the artist-trader threatens now-time. Our present is not any more alarmed by the machinic attempt to predict the future. Through the combination of calculation and prediction first the future is determined by counting all which is uncountable, assimilating all differences and dissimilarities, making everything lookalike, and then or at the same time our present is adapted to that determined future.

Today, when derivatives carry out the dispossession of the self and of property, good old possessive individualism is thus also put in its grave.

Rather than in the traditional view of derivatives as a phantasmal break of linear time and colonization of the future, these are much more lateral movements and new concatenations of spaces in present time. The derivative

sociality appears as translocal and transnational in the strong sense – beyond nationality, as a prospect of a completely different form of concatenation at the planetary level. The abstract line of the derivative is drawn toward all sides, as a deterritorialization of the border, as a machinicdividual concatenation of parts that do not seem to belong together. The temporality of the social logic of the derivative, on the other hand, is less the anticipation of the future in futures, but rather an expanded present that spreads out in multilateral and mutual exchange in the here and now.

So here we finally come to the title No Future. In a time where some cybernetical order seems to prevent us from entering the future, I’d propose to remember the weak messaniac force of God Save the Queen and the Sex Pistols’ angry, joyous and affirmative no future slogans from nearly 40 years ago. Turn it around, forget your desires for a better future, and dividualize the present becoming, the here and now, the now-time, fully in keeping with the described logic of algorithms, logistics and derivatives where only dividuality counts. For these operations we need the postpunk, funked out power of anti-utopian dividual monsters of now-time, subverting the visionary artist-traders of machinic capitalism.

Gerald Raunig: DIVIDUUM. Machinic Capitalism and Molecular Revolution, The MIT Press, Published by: Semiotext(e) / Foreign Agents, 2016.

1 Harney/Moten, Undercommons, 87-99.

2 Cf. Nassim Nicolas Taleb’s concept of “white” and “black swans” (the former stands for the exact occurrence of perfect prediction, the latter for the ideal condition of the improbable) in ibid., The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, New York: Random House 2007.

3 Cf. Elie Ayache, The Blank Swan. The End of Probability, Hoboken: Wiley 2010.

SYLVIA ECKERMANN

SINGUL ARIUM

Interpassive object, 2015 4 channel sound composition Polystyrene sheets and mirrors Monitor, camera, computer 160 x 160 x 80 cm

Composition of the voices: Szely Construction: Bela Eckermann

Images & sketches by the artist Photo credit, p. 20: Andreas Diem The work was realised with the support of The Arts and Culture Division of the Federal Chancellery of Austria.