OK; I’ll try and blog at least one talk. Kate Hayles “The Storyteller, the INtelligent Machine, and the Manager: Complex Somethings of something and data.” (such a long title, and changed from the program, so I didn’t get it all. Hayles has a new book out this month: My Mother Was a Computer
Digital Subjects and Literary Texts

The internet is a cognitive system: cognisphere:
Cognition can happen inside (endogenic) or outside (exogenic) our bodies. Much cognition in the cognisphere is machine-related and not conscious.

Natural language has as its addressee only humans. Code has two addressees: humans and intelligent machinens. But most code is inaccessible to most users. Only a couple of dozen humans on the planet can read binary code with any fluency, so there is always a level of code that is all but inaccessible to humans.

Conscious is to the Unconscious as Language is to Code. Code is the unconscious of language.

With computer-mediated communication we have a new connection, not just between the conscious and the unconscious, but also between the traumatic aconscious to the technological nonconscious. (This is going really fast, I really don’t know what these terms mean). The technological nonconscious, which has existed since the first artefacts, has now become cognitive
which opens up new ways of something.

Code provides a resource for representing trauma.

Example: Gibson’s Pattern Recognitiono.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

6 thoughts on “kate hayles’ mother was a computer

  1. jess

    Oh good, this is better than my notes.

    I think all the traumatic aconscious stuff was peripheral to the main point, which was that code is the unconscious of language (which sounds pretty familiar after reading My Mother Was a Computer). The technological nonconscious is the code and the intelligent machines, AFAICT.

  2. Jill

    LOL. If that was better than your notes at least it means more people than I had trouble keeping up, cos my notes aren’t that great now I look at them again! It all sounded very convincing while she was saying it – except I’m not sure I’m convinced about all those difference unconsciouses, but then I haven’t yet read the book.

  3. Jess`

    The book’s very interesting, and don’t worry, I haven’t encountered half of those consciousnesses/nonconsciousnesses yet. The conscious/technological nonconscious interaction and the analogies (and contrasts) between language and code are more the subject of the book. I’m not done, but it’s not coming off nearly as Freud-spattered as the talk seemed to be.

  4. Eric

    Kate Hayles book sounds very interesting. BTW I think you meant Gibson’s Pattern Recognition (http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/isbn/0399149864). Excellent blog – I enjoy reading it.

  5. clivado

    I think thay book is very interesting. I read your blog about a year, keep a good work.

    Regards Clivado

  6. JoseAngel

    Code = unconscious? That may work as an image for certain rhetorical purposes, or poetic ones as in Gibson’s novel; but I should mistrust any such sweeping analogies, which involve concentrating on some faintly similar relationships and ignoring the differences… which are of course more prominent than the common elements!

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.