{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","title":"The Stack On Software and Sovereignty","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9780262029575","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","id":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","uuid":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","title":"The Stack On Software and Sovereignty","normalized_title":"thestackonsoftwareandsovereignty","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9780262029575","isbns":["9780262029575"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":517,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/The%20Stack%20On%20Software%20and%20Sovereignty","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/search"},"page":{"printed_page":276,"pdf_page":292,"physical_index":292,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"d5e3e622530257351d297d71fef9d307f47edb3e77a603fd777745b612c871e2"},"chapter":"Fheck The Stack |On Software and Sovereignty Benjamin H. Bratton","content":"But the shifting of relations between humans and animals, mutually co-constituted by shared interfaces, needn ’ t be limited to placing animals in isolated control over more and more complex prosthetic technologies, letting them find their own purposes in The Stack, as wonderful as that design brief surely is. The positioning of human and animal as co-Users of interfacial platforms also demonstrates the scope of communication and identification that is possible when both occupy symmetrical locations within the platform. OOZ is a series of projects led by Natalie Jeremijenko, that seeks to expand from the restrictive and hierarchical forms of human/animal encounter available in zoos, where animals are trapped in place for observation but really where communication between species is at best serendipitous and at worst systematically suppressed. The project description explains that “ unlike the traditional zoo [OOZ] is a place where the animals remain by choice, a zoo without cages. Like a traditional zoo, it is a series of sites where animals and humans interact. However, the interactions at an OOZ site differ from that of a zoo. OOZ is interactive in that it provides human a set of actions, the animals provide reactions and these couplets add up to a collective pool of observations and encounters. The human/animal interface has two components: (1) an architecture of reciprocity, i.e. any action you can direct at the animal, they can direct at you and (2) an information architecture of collective observation and interpretation. ” The basic proposition is then extended in several instantiations featuring variously robotic geese, human-goose language translation media, bird art, amazing birdhouses, amphibious architecture, restaurants for fish and humans to share a common meal, stages for human/bat encounter in dense urban settings, and so on. The project employs of a kind of expanded interaction design, and its built-in structuring of the User position, as a way to leverage a rotation in pervasive and unnecessary asymmetries between human and animal actors in general: animals are no longer prosthetic channels and metabolic reserves but collaborative co-Users. This is not only for the benefit of the animals but also as a way to allow curious humans an introduction to the fascinating lifeworlds of our neighbors and to experience more satisfying sorts of communication with them. Critical to this is the design of reciprocal interfaces in which both sides of the interfacial membrane have equally impactful (if not always identical) means to affect the other. Here, that multipolar field for which the User subject position can be inhabited by a plurality of individual and aggregated agents draws not on the prosthetic radiation of control, in either direction, but rather on leveling the species-agnostic User position toward the open invention of alternative common interfaces. <sup>42</sup> The impetus for Agamben ’ s plea that the essential accomplishment of the subjectivizing apparatuses is to “ nullify animalistic behaviors ” is also put to rest.\n\n276\n\nUser Layer","previous_page":275,"next_page":277}