A vision of digital technology driven by self-management and the transformation of data into common goods.

Synopsis of this future

Faced with an increasingly complex digital landscape, dominated by monopolistic actors quick to abuse their power (under the guise of improving our digital experiences), and heightened state surveillance for security and health reasons, opposition movements are taking shape, and alternatives are multiplying.

In this world, by 2030, society is marked by the rise of self-managed movements and civil society collectives, which are choosing to leverage societal transitions to make digital technology a true common good.

Inspired by the utopian ideals of the ZAD (Zone à Défendre) movements, these groups are quick to renew the Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace in our “physical” lives, applying principles of horizontal self-management and inclusive collectives.

Fragments of f·r·iction

↘
Reclaiming control over our digital lives in this future begins with a grassroots education on and through digital literacy. Assemblies are organised at the foot of apartment blocks, in parks, and in community centres, teaching responsible digital practices (sharing only as much as you wish, dealing with harassment, and tackling misinformation/disinformation), as well as informing users about their rights. It’s no longer just associations at the forefront; several collectives have had the idea to repurpose on-demand economy models to allow anyone to volunteer as a digital helper whether for fifteen minutes or a day.

↘
Grassroots movements also act as educators, helping the most vulnerable users navigate and understand increasingly obscure terms and conditions. Some specialise in practical support, helping even novice users find loopholes or workarounds to take control of or subvert proprietary digital solutions.

Other movements, often spontaneous and linked to ongoing struggles, organise protests or occupations against private algorithms replacing public services, or against the black-box collection and processing of data. Remarkably, these protests are “learning occupations”, creating a space in the streets that integrates with daily life to deliver true popular education, raising awareness of these techno-social issues.

↘
While online spaces remain largely locked down against any form of dissent, the streets have once again (re)become the territory of digital struggles.
Legal guerrilla campaigns are popping up, with the most famous being “Display Your Rights”: a series of posters, written in clear and direct language, plastered in streets and in places frequented by vulnerable people (workplaces, supermarkets, local shops) as well as at iconic digital venues (coworking spaces, the last remaining tech stores, smart urban furniture). These posters offer clear and explicit instructions and “tactics” on how to assert one’s rights, protect privacy, or use digital technologies for the common good.

↘
Public pressure has also led to changes in legislation: there is now a legal obligation to display clear, educational information on 20% of online advertising space, covering user rights and virtuous digital practices for the common good or public interest. However, the GAFAM and BATX companies were quick to hijack this initiative for their own purposes in a subtle “ethic-washing” campaign.

↘
Civil society has organised to create a form of digital social protection, with “site-medics” (the digital equivalent of street medics) providing care for physical and psychological ailments caused by digital use – conditions not yet recognised by occupational health services or traditional social security.

↘
Contrary to what their critics continue to assert, these popular movements are not technophobic Luddites. They rally around a shared demand: the establishment of a fairer model. Data management cooperatives are emerging, working to transform data into common goods. This applies both to data produced by cooperative members and data bought through crowdfunding from data brokers, either to put it into the commons or delete it (to prevent it from being exploited by “surveillance capitalism” forces in the future, as activists put it).

↘
In this context, several associations are campaigning for the recognition of algorithmic injustice, highlighting the discrimination and inequalities encoded into the systems that govern our digital lives. Some activist groups use dramatic actions, holding symbolic trials. In the spirit of restorative and popular justice, algorithms that have harmed individuals or communities are put on trial.

Far from the summary and illegitimate justice to which some political authorities try to associate them, these trials are both cathartic moments and didactic experiences. However, they have not been without notable excesses, including the physical assault of individuals and companies that produced or used the algorithms deemed guilty of crimes against humanity.