{"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":451,"pdf_page":465,"physical_index":465,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"00a09d27767aaaabcfde1a2300a000cc8b1dd4612ce5b972ecc12799ff3fc75c"},"chapter":"Fheck The Stack |On Software and Sovereignty Benjamin H. Bratton","content":"62. See Stuart Elden, The Birth of Territory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013).\n\n63. The Security and Exchange Commission ’ s 2005 Regulation National Market System (Reg NMS), which required that traders execute trades at the “ best price for their clients, ” of which an unintended consequence was the rise of “ dark pools ” that incentivize large traders to build market simulations to make trades against. See http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142405270 2304886904579475584095555384; Michael Lewis, Flash Boys: A Wall Street Revolt (New York: Norton, 2014); and US Securities and Exchange Commission, Division of Market Regulation, Regulation National Market System (Washington, DC, 2005).\n\n64. Paul Krugman, “ Bits and Barbarism, ” New York Times, December 22, 2013, http://www .nytimes.com/2013/12/23/opinion/krugman-bits-and-barbarism.html.\n\n65. Once more, a different connotation for the word “ hyperobject” than Timothy Morton ’ s.\n\n66. Niklas Luhmann, Dirk Baecker, and Peter Gilgen, Introduction to Systems Theory (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2012).\n\n67. It does so by representing the full scale of planetary systems and in doing so suggests some authority over them. As seen most explicitly in computational megaprojects such as Planetary Skin, the ascendance of data visualization as a governing visual rhetoric allows for, if not also demands, the pictorial coherence of worldly systems otherwise dedifferentiated. As GUI come to take on more of the look and utility of data visualization (the image-instrument diagram discussed in the Interface chapter), the same tilt toward not just comprehensive images but also total images and image-instruments. In other words, interfacial regimes make claims on the always reconfigurable geoscapes that frame the social, economic, or religious significance of any chain of interaction, and which by repetition comes to physically enforce that regime in the world. The symptomatic interest in reflecting a master diagram onto the world as if its mimetic regularity were interchangeable with the regulation of that world not only persists but is amplified by the affordances of planetary computation. The instrumentalized “ world picture ” functions not only as a projective image of a claim into the geoscape, as any utopian image does; it channels the utopian program of that projection not only into the abstract futurity of an image of a world in the future but also as a literal technology for the management of that future today. It renders its utopia less by the implied resolution of a meta-history than as meta-interfaciality.\n\n68. This is perhaps a kind of reverse skeuomorphism. They automate consent, like automating a decision by building it into an interface.\n\nNotes\n\n451","previous_page":450,"next_page":452}