@ -16,19 +16,21 @@ It's an approach that helps us to think about software as a cultural object. Som
---
An object that, in turn, can be used to probe its surrounding environment. Who is developing it? Who is paying? For what cause? Who is gonna use it? How is it structured? It is a big and centralized system or a loose collection of small and interchangable tools?
An object that, in turn, can be used to probe its surroundings. Who is developing? Who is paying? For what cause? Who is gonna use it? How is it structured? It is a big and centralized system or a loose collection of small and interchangable tools?
There is a difference in scale of space and time between our biological and social selves, and the internal clock of a computer, or the reach of its network. This often lead us to picture wrong images of the technological complexity we are participating in. That's why in order to debug complexity we probably first need to debug software (Shirky, 2014). Understand how does it work, or why it doesn't work the way we expect, either in its technical, cultural, or environmental outcomes. Understand what can be changed and adjusted, and being able to reason about it.
<!-- better transition here -->
To participate in the making of software it's a way to attune with the troubled times we are living in. A chance to gain understanding and agency on systems that often slip away from our awareness because too big and slow, or small and fast. Relying on the unthinkable speed of microprocessors and the phantasmal aura of wi-fi, we can make some sense of the unknown of software (Chun, 2022), and the alien and convoluted knowledge they constitute.
There is a difference in scale of space and time between our biological and social selves, and the internal clock of a computer, or the reach of its network. This often leads us to picture wrong images of the technological complexity we are participating in. That's why in order to debug complexity we probably first need to debug software (Shirky, 2014). Understand how does it work, or why it doesn't work the way we expect, either in its technical, cultural, or environmental outcomes. Unpack what can be changed and adjusted, and being able to reason about it.
This process does not stop with programming, and it is both more and less than just an engineering problem. It is more because of its relational nature, the fine mesh of exchanges and compromises in the communication between people and machine, and between people and people, and between people and resources, and resources and time, and so on. But is it also less than that in the way that when it works it works, and code disappears.
To participate in the making of software it's a way to attune with the troubled times we are living in. A chance to gain some understanding and agency on systems that often slip away from our awareness because too big and slow, or small and fast. Relying on the unthinkable speed of microprocessors and the phantasmal aura of wi-fi, we can make sense of the unknown of software (Chun, 2022), and the alien and convoluted knowledge it constitutes.
This process does not stop with programming, and it is both more and less than just an engineering problem. It is more because of its relational nature, the thick mesh of exchanges and compromises in communication between people and machine, and between people and people, and between people and resources, and resources and time, and so on. But is it also less than that because when it works it works, and code disappears.
### 1.2 Introduce issues around software
This economy of interactions and interfaces results in a bestiary of bugs, glitches, and issues that affect and effectivly shape what we do call software culture. Far from being caused just by the intersection of life and code, many of these problems root into ideologies and forms of violence that plague the world long before Google. The problem of unealthy work environments and gender gap in the IT sector it's the first elephant in a room that should be, at this point, called natural reserve. Uneven distribution of access, evergrowing hunger for resources, extractive practices for perpetual growth, etc.
This economy of interactions and interfaces results in a bestiary of bugs, glitches, and issues that affect and effectivly shape what we do call software culture. Far from being caused just by the intersection of life and code, many of these problems root into ideologies and forms of violence that plague the world long before Google. The problem of toxic masculinity and gender gap in the IT it's the first elephant in a room that should be, at this point, called natural reserve. Uneven distribution of access, evergrowing hunger for resources, extractive and neo-colonial practices, etc.
These critical questions relate with software from different angles and distances, so it is useful to draft a map of the swamp we want to navigate into.
These critical questions relate with software from different angles and distances, so it is useful to draft a map of the swamp we want to navigate into. Writing from the eye, there are three main aspects in sight: the violence of bias and hostile environments, the challenge of complexity, and the empty promises of techno-solutionism.
1. **Biased and hostile environments**
@ -37,9 +39,11 @@ These critical questions relate with software from different angles and distance
