To love automation is to love statistics; unwavering, unquestioned, unambiguously and as purely wholesome?

In 1749 the “Summarisk Tabell” or the first  “systematic collection of statistics” was architectured by the Swedish government and its “Tabellverket” which means ‘tabular work.’ In this context  it became to mean their office for tabulation and was entitled ‘Statistiska centralbyrån’ or the Swedish Central Bureau of Statistics (The Joy of Stats 2010: 12:10)

Spiegelhalter rationally reminds us that statistics used to be called “political arithmetic”. (Ibid: 14:24).

Statistics is etymologically related to the Latin word “status.” In turn, this directly links to the concept of “political state”. The statista, or statesmen, were/are probably more skilled in affairs of state, unveiling and organizing resources for they who were controlling and running the state, than skilled in the measurement or probability via numerical accuracy. They were skilled toward the industrialization of the resources of the state. “In what way is the status ‘a’ changin’?,” might here then be a concern in favor of status rather than too much in favor of change and too many outliers. Is then (social) innovation at all times looked upon with eagerness?

This historical awareness is allowing one possible dimension in continuing processes of (mis)understanding of what was then a drive for increased control and perceived decrease of misunderstanding of (their) populations.

It is however not history alone. Similar centers of power are at play today. They might be nation states. They might be transnational. They might be known as corporate entities or (private) financial institutions. Please note, one does not need to loose track into any conspiracy theorizing to identify these. By the way, the latter I sense as a conspiracy-of-the-self against the self, by using hyperambiguating narratives (aka conspiracies) as a blindfold of what is (is as “realities”) versus what is-imagined. The real(s) is(are) “fantastical” enough (to me).

Returning back to the above referenced video —hosted by the delightful, energetic and sadly late Professor Rosling— it continues in unveiling the 19th century popular excitement for statistical (visualized) facts. Today, with a popular engrossment with distrust as a proverbial spoon, excitement is stirring up and thinning down statistical fact. We could note that by questioning our present-day versions of feudal masters we might also be deconstructing our own tools to enable us to question the same (a “conspiracy of the “self” serving the “self”?). The false linear dichotomy is as disenfranchising as any side of this faux-2D plastic coin: “Ambiguate all and thy shall be ruled through your fog. Disambiguate all and they shall be hammered and tyrannized.“

As with statistics, automation too could be controlling and enabling, rational and mesmerizing. Logos and pathos. Enlightening and clouding. liberating and enshackling; …ad infinitum and gone immediately. While ethos might have been sulking in the corner.

In light of enablement and increasing both awareness and voice, W.E.B Du Bois’ work, for instance, is still an awe-inspiring and humbling exemplar, especially to the statistically-privileged and exnominated samples within the larger and diverse human population.

Automation could be interpreted as an applied extension of statistical control and narrowing of understanding by means of repurposing, appropriating and regurgitating the statistical styles of the most likely/ed (resources).

Automation, as statistics, was initially not invested into with the aim of democratization. It was a matter of control, understanding, and increase of efficiencies toward a more desired return for those who initiated and enabled the creation, architecturing and implementation.

The needed “ambiguation” (here meaning: pluralization, nuancing, modding and jailbreaking of meaning, relation, intent, application, usage, etc.) of initial intent by diversification and decentralization of intent(s), could best be seen as a process rather than an opposition against a more popular idea of a fixed denotation of language (this latter which I would prefer not subscribing to too rigidly either).

Riding yet another vector: statistics applications could be cannibalizing statistics. This could be seen as one type of ambiguation. Clear information through the lens of statistics is undone by automated diffusing statistical probabilities, possibly waging siege (with mal-, mis- and dis-information as arsenals) against initiatives aiming to unveil the incorrect and (almost) unconscious, biased “stats” we impose, as people, onto ourselves (and others). This latter too can be seen as yet another type of ambiguation. Herewith might come to mind such initiatives as Gapminder (see Rosling), Our World in Data, The Deep, etc. These are initiatives in counterattack against conspiracies, scaled bias, systemic mis-, mal- and dis-informing/conception (…and yet, brittle these aforementioned initiatives are as well).

Automation and statistics are not inherently, nor complacently, democratizing, freeing, nor enlightening. There is nothing inherently socio-historically linear nor monolithic about these. They can be and have been historically invented and applied as such though. They are/should neither (be) a fait accompli to defining your acts, relations nor realities. There must be vigilant, at times incessant, work and a labor of citizen love.

It might be felt as a real-time theater play with the actors Ambiguous and Disambiguous, in the starring roles portraying luscious eroticism between fact and fuzz, creating worlds as stages for realities re-re-formed.

References

animasuri’23. (2022). Data in, fear and euphoria out. (Blog). https://www.animasuri.com/iOi/?p=3480

animasuri’23. (2023). Learning is Relational Entertainment; … (blog).  https://www.animasuri.com/iOi/?p=4442

Aschenwall, Gottfried. (1748). Vorbereitung zur Staatswissenschaft der heutigen fürnehmsten europäischen Reiche und Staaten.

Battle-Baptiste, W., Du Bois, W.E. B., Rusert, B. (2018). W.E.B Du Bois’s data portraits. visualizing Black America. Princeton Architectural Press.

Dehbozorgi, Alireza. (2023). LinkedIn post: “”Language is an instrument of political and social domination. From ancient China to Europe, the number of words and languages one mastered were signs of belonging to an elite. Artificial intelligence is reshaping the linguistic landscape. An interview with linguist Stefanie Ullmann, machine learning specialist Omolabake Adenle, and philosopher Marc Crepon.” from: ARTE.tv Documentary. (2023). AI and Language

Gapminder  https://ourworldindata.org/

Rosling, H. (2010). IN: Hillman, D, et al. (2010). The Joy of Stats with Professor Hans Rosling.  (Video) BBC & Wingspan Production via Gapminder  last retrieved on May 8, 2023 from https://vimeo.com/18477762

Rosling, H., Rosling Ronnlund, A. (2018). Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong About the World–and Why Things Are Better Than You Think. Flatiron Books; Later prt. editio

Our World in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/

Sustainable Development Goals Tracker (https://sdg-tracker.org/) 

The Deep: http://thedeep.io/

van Bergen, Emille. (20223). quoting Marc Crepon “…we basically need to maintain a relationship with language that resists anything aiming to format it, calculate it or program it…” via Dehbozorgi, Alireza. (2023). LinkedIn post