Plenty of great reading: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C44&q=alg...
Although I am not sure that captures the problem of technofascism.
Algorithmic/Cybernetic Governance is not malicious. It's just stupid. It's a mistake made by well meaning but misguided and poorly read people who have a vicariously omnipotent fantasy that machines can run things. Ultimately it's their intent to step back and bask in an autonomous land of milk, honey, magical plenitude and obedience.
Technofascism has a malicious and power hungry side. For that lot, computers are simple weapons of enslavement.
I also think the Cyberneticians are more honest and open, They really believe in their ambitious but naive vision. The technofascists are duplicitous. They know people won't buy their control fetish, so spend a lot more on presentation, sugar frosting, and outright lies about the "benefits of digital technology", and their own intentions.
Absolutely. I vehemently disagree with this essay. One of the reasons I am a passionate technology critic and sceptic is that I love technology and feel disgusted at the way it's co-opted and abused.
I am always vigilant not to become jaded or lose sight of the immense positive possibilities for digital technologies. But I sincerely believe that before that can happen and we can move into the true golden era of technological humanism, Big Tech, surveillance culture and over-bearing governments must be eliminated.
> it's inherent to the people and institutions making use of them.
I disagree. It resides within them and is amplified by technologies. "Inherent" implies that it is an indelible, fundamental feature. Not at all. Humans, as individuals and institutions can do better. We're just seeing amplification and facilitation of the same old human weaknesses, laziness, greed, stupidity, fear - go pick up some Aristotle, or any religious text for a comprehensive list of moral failings.
> Computers are neutral technology.
Not quite. All technologies carry values in their design. An AK47 and a baby incubator carry different values, one is a for taking life and one is for preserving it. At a more subtle granularity computers carry values with them. I recommend Edwin Black's "IBM and the Holocaust" for some insights here. A Google Pixel carries different values than a Raspberry Pi - though to most eyes the differences are invisible.
> It's just that we are increasingly losing control of them. We're no longer the ones making the rules, the corporations and governments are.
Yes, computers have enabled tyranny. That's hardly debatable now. I call it techno-fascism. Other people use different terms. It's there in everything from Facebook to "cashless commerce".
> The computers belong to them now
So long as computers are controlled by software, which is mutable, the more complete and devastating will be the reversal when we take them back. There is always poetry and irony in ultimate justice. One way of looking at it is the tyrants are simply building the apparatus to enable the greatest and most audacious bloodless revolution in the history of mankind. The future of freedom depends on "hackers".
Sell them more rope.