Are we cogs in someone else’s world machine?
Andy Dearden
Sheffield Hallam University
Sheffield, UK
a.m.dearden@shu.ac.uk
ABSTRACT
The concept of world machines as collaborative sociotechnical networks that enable the creation of public value
is attractive, but we may commit a category error if we
focus exclusively on those machines that are oriented to
producing better worlds and sharing that value with a global
commons. Other socio-technical networks with similar
surface characteristics may engage us in activities that
could be producing less desirable worlds.
Author Keywords
World machines, wikipedia
ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.m. Information interfaces and presentation (e.g., HCI):
Miscellaneous
INTRODUCTION
The concept of ‘World Machine’ has an attractive and
hopeful ring about it, which may persuade us of new
possibilities for improving the lot of humanity and the
situation on this planet. But as I sit pondering the aftermath
of the UK’s recent general election, in which the most
reactionary and regressive national government that
Western Europe has seen since the fall of the Iberian
dictatorships, has been elected, I want to sound a note of
caution. The immediate future for the UK will see the rapid
handover to private interests of assets and institutions that
have been constructed by the collective contributions of the
British public over 70 years. This contrast between
collectively owned and managed resources and privately
operated institutions is a lens that should not be forgotten
when discussing ‘world machines’.
Wikipedia is a superb achievement and worthy of study.
Labelling and promoting it as a ‘world machine’ could be a
useful way to highlight the value of the technical and social
infrastructure and to draw attention to the achievement. But
presenting Wikipedia as the archetypal example of a ‘world
Paste the appropriate copyright/license statement here. ACM now supports
three different publication options:
 ACM copyright: ACM holds the copyright on the work. This is the
historical approach.
 License: The author(s) retain copyright, but ACM receives an
exclusive publication license.
 Open Access: The author(s) wish to pay for the work to be open
access. The additional fee must be paid to ACM.
This text field is large enough to hold the appropriate release statement
assuming it is single-spaced in Times New Roman 8-point font. Please do
not change or modify the size of this text box.
Each submission will be assigned a DOI string to be included here.
machine’ may be unhelpful. What Wikipedia demonstrates
is the value that can be achieved by the collective, coordinated efforts of a (open) group of people (Wikipedians)
working together to construct and maintain a shared asset as
an expression of their collectively identified and shared
human values.
One way to look at Wikipedia, or any other world machine,
is to analyse the machines as a socio-technical network.
From the viewpoint of Actor Network Theory, Wikipedia
can be understood as a Actor-Network (or an Actant) that
offers a technical manifestation (the web site) as its
obligatory passage point (cf. Law & Hetherington, 2000).
To participate in the Wikipedia world machine one must
use the site (whether as a reader or as a writer. Creating an
account on the site allows participants to join in the broader
editorial effort and debate. The great achievement of
Wikipedia is in presenting a passage point (a technical
manifestation) that so many people are able to identify as a
worthwhile public good that they are motivated to
contribute to this ‘greater than self’ effort. Simultaneously,
Wikipedia succeeds in also supporting an ongoing
community of activity that maintains and sustains that
effort. That has demanded a cleverly designed framework
of technical tools and social practices. These practices are
not merely the on-line behaviours of Wikipedians, but also
the efforts of leaders such as Jimmy Wales in promoting the
concept, and the behaviours of people with influence such
as teachers and academics in responding to students’ use of
this platform.
And yet, while Wikipedia offers only one view of what a
socio-technical system built around global Internet
technologies can produce. From a systemic perspective, it is
dwarfed by other more sinister ‘world machines’ or global
socio-technical networks, that are utilise similar technical
and design principles, but (I would argue) are currently
operated in ways that are ultimately antithetical to
sustainable human development. These world machines
share Wikipedia’s form in presenting their Obligatory
Passage Point in the form of a web site or web service that
provides sufficient value to people that they perceive it as a
useful good and are motivated to use the services offered.
As users of these systems, we provide content and data, and
collaborate by encouraging others to connect to these
networks. But these contributions, whilst providing some
immediate value to us as users, are also used by the
systems’ owners to seek private profits. Most often, the
source of these profits is advertising revenue which is
maximised by being able to cleverly target advertising at
individuals who (based on the information we have
provided about ourselves) are most likely to be persuaded
to purchase and consume goods that they might otherwise
not have consumed. In a world of finite resources and
where global warming generated by the consumption of one
group of men (& women) is already bringing misery and
death to other groups of men and women who did not cause
the problem, it would be irresponsible to restrict our
analysis of ‘World Machines’ to those machines whose
guiding philosophy is collective human flourishing.
The Soft Systems methodology (Checkland & Scholes,
1990) gives a generic framework for viewing such sociotechnical systems by reviewing six attributes of such
systems, with the acronym: CATWOE (Customers, Actors,
Transformation, Worldview, Owner and Environment). For
Wikipedia, the analysis might identify:




Customer: Any users who are able to access
the Internet and browse the Web
Actors: Users editing pages, discussing
pages, moderating discussions, and those
ensuring that technical systems (servers,
storage space) are maintained;
Transformation: From the individual
knowledge and learning of the people using
the platform to a collected, reviewed,
edited and indexed encyclopaedia of
knowledge in multiple languages;
Worldview: That open discussion and
debate, centred around a neutral point of


view provides a basis for stable generation
of reliable knowledge and information that
reflects ideas such as peer review;
Owner: A not-for-profit foundation with
open and democratic organising principles
and defined charitable aims that require it
to place intellectual products in the public
domain;
Environment: An open world wide web and
Internet that is, however, still dominated
by a small subset of human languages.
This framework, particularly asking questions regarding
ownership, transformations and worldview may be
important aspects to consider when analysing the various
other world machines that we are drawn to and caught up
in. Yes, there is a value in studying how constructive,
collaborative action can be stimulated and encouraged in a
globally connected world. But we will not make progress
unless we recognise and analyse the other world machines
that operate in these same spaces.
REFERENCES
Checkland, Peter, and Jim Scholes. Soft systems
methodology in action. Vol. 7. Chichester: Wiley,
1990.
John Law and Kevin Hetherington (2000), Materialities,
Globalities, Spatialities’, in John Bryson, Peter Daniels,
Nick Henry and Jane Pollard (eds), Knowledge, Space,
Economy, London, Routledge, pp 34 - 49
.