Anticipating digital futures: ruins, entanglements and the possibilities of shared technology making

References

• Amoore, L., and R. Raley. 2017. “Securing with Algorithms: Knowledge, Decision, Sovereignty.” Security Dialogue 48 (1): 3–10. doi:10.1177/0967010616680753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barns, S. 2016. “Mine Your Data: Open Data, Digital Strategies and Entrepreneurial Governance by Code.” Urban Geography 37 (4): 554–571. doi:10.1080/02723638.2016.1139876.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, J. 2012. “‘This Is What Modern Deregulation Looks Like’: Co-Optation and Contestation in the Shaping of the UK’s Open Government Data Initiative’.” The Journal of Community Informatics 8 (2). http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/article/view/845/916
   Google Scholar
• Bates, J. 2013. “The Domestication of Open Government Data Advocacy in the United Kingdom: A Neo-Gramscian Analysis.” Policy & Internet 5 (1): 118–137. doi:10.1002/poi3.25.
   Google Scholar
• Beer, D. 2010. “Mobile Music, Coded Objects and Everyday Spaces.” Mobilities 5 (4): 469–484. doi:10.1080/17450101.2010.510331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birtchnell, T., and J. Urry. 2013. “Fabricating Futures and the Movement of Objects.” Mobilities 8 (3): 388–405. doi:10.1080/17450101.2012.745697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Büscher, M. 2019. “Social Futures.” In Mobilities and Complexities, edited by O. B. Jensen, S. Kesselring, and M. Sheller, 185–196. NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Büscher, M., X. Kerasidou, M. Liegl, and K. Petersen. 2016. “Digital Urbanism in Crises.” In Code and the City, edited by R. Kitchin and S.-Y. Perng, 163–177. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Büscher, M., M. Sheller, and D. Tyfield. 2016. “Mobility Intersections: Social Research, Social Futures.” Mobilities 11 (4): 485–497. doi:10.1080/17450101.2016.1211818.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardullo, P., and R. Kitchin. 2017. “Being a ‘Citizen’ in the Smart City: Up and down the Scaffold of Smart Citizen Participation.” GeoJournal  84 (1): 1–13. doi:10.1007/s10708-018-9845-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H. W. 2006. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, E. G. 2013. Coding Freedom: The Ethics and Aesthetics of Hacking. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Corsín Jiménez, A. 2014. “The Right to Infrastructure: A Prototype for Open Source Urbanism.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 32 (2): 342–362. doi:10.1068/d13077p.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowley, R., S. Joss, and Y. Dayot. 2018. “The Smart City and Its Publics: Insights from across Six UK Cities.” Urban Research & Practice 11 (1): 53–77. doi:10.1080/17535069.2017.1293150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Ignazio, C., A. Hope, B. Michelson, R. Churchill, and E. Zuckerman. 2016. “A Feminist HCI Approach to Designing Postpartum Technologies: ‘When I First Saw A Breast Pump I Was Wondering if It Was A Joke’”. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, Canada, 2612–2622.
   Google Scholar
• de Lange, M., and M. de Waal. 2013. “Owning the City: New Media and Citizen Engagement in Urban Design.” First Monday 18: 11. doi:10.5210/fm.v18i11.4954.
   Google Scholar
• Ettlinger, N. 2017. “Open Innovation and Its Discontents.” Geoforum 80 (March): 61–71. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.01.011.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J., A. Karvonen, and R. Raven, eds. 2016. The Experimental City. London and NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ford, H., and J. Wajcman. 2017. “‘Anyone Can Edit’, Not Everyone Does: Wikipedia’s Infrastructure and the Gender Gap.” Social Studies of Science 47 (4): 511–527. doi:10.1177/0306312717692172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freudendal-Pedersen, M., and S. Kesselring. 2016. “Mobilities, Futures & the City: Repositioning Discourses – Changing Perspectives – Rethinking Policies.” Mobilities 11 (4): 575–586. doi:10.1080/17450101.2016.1211825.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gabrys, J. 2016. Program Earth: Environmental Sensing Technology and the Making of a Computational Planet. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goggin, G. 2016. “Disability and Mobilities: Evening up Social Futures.” Mobilities 11 (4): 533–541. doi:10.1080/17450101.2016.1211821.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregg, M. 2015. “Hack for Good: Speculative Labour, App Development and the Burden of Austerity.” The Fibreculture Journal, No 25: 185–202. doi:10.15307/fcj.25.186.2015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haas, P. M. 1992. “Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination.” International Organization 46 (1): 1–35. doi:10.1017/S0020818300001442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halpern, O., J. LeCavalier, N. Calvillo, and W. Pietsch. 2013. “Test-Bed Urbanism.” Public Culture 25 (2 70): 272–306. doi:10.1215/08992363-2020602.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irani, L. 2015. “Hackathons and the Making of Entrepreneurial Citizenship.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 40 (5): 799–824. doi:10.1177/0162243915578486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, P. A., R. Sieber, T. Scassa, M. Stephens, and P. Robinson. 2017. “The Cost(S) of Geospatial Open Data.” Transactions in GIS 21 (3): 434–445. doi:10.1111/tgis.12283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelty, C. 2008. Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kitchin, R. 2014. “The Real-Time City? Big Data and Smart Urbanism.” GeoJournal 79 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1007/s10708-013-9516-8.
   Google Scholar
• Leszczynski, A. 2012. “Situating the Geoweb in Political Economy.” Progress in Human Geography 36 (1): 72–89. doi:10.1177/0309132511411231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leszczynski, A. 2016. “Speculative Futures: Cities, Data, and Governance beyond Smart Urbanism.” Environment and Planning A 48 (9): 1691–1708. doi:10.1177/0308518X16651445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindtner, S. 2015. “Hacking with Chinese Characteristics: The Promises of the Maker Movement against China’s Manufacturing Culture.” Science, Technology & Human Values 40 (5): 854–879. doi:10.1177/0162243915590861.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodato, T. J., and C. DiSalvo. 2016. “Issue-Oriented Hackathons as Material Participation.” New Media & Society 18 (4): 539–557. doi:10.1177/1461444816629467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maalsen, S., and S.-Y. Perng. 2016. “Encountering the City at Hacking Events.” In Code and the City, edited by R. Kitchin and S.-Y. Perng, 190–199. London and NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Maalsen, S., and S.-Y. Perng. 2017. “Crafting Code: Gender, Coding and Spatial Hybridity in the Events of PyLadies Dublin.” In Craft Economies, edited by S. Luckman and N. Thomas, 223–232. London & NY: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Marres, N. 2007. “The Issues Deserve More Credit: Pragmatist Contributions to the Study of Public Involvement in Controversy.” Social Studies of Science 37 (5): 759–780. doi:10.1177/0306312706077367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marres, N. 2012. Material Participation: Technology, the Environment and Everyday Publics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Marvin, S., A. Luque-Ayala, and C. McFarlane, eds. 2016. Smart Urbanism: Utopian Vision or False Dawn. NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mattern, S. 2014. “Interfacing Urban Intelligence”. Places Journal, https://placesjournal.org/article/interfacing-urban-intelligence/
   Google Scholar
• Mattern, S. 2016. “Instrumental City: The View from Hudson Yards”. Places Journal, April. https://placesjournal.org/article/instrumental-city-new-york-hudson-yards/
   Google Scholar
• Mouffe, C. 2013. Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Nafus, D. 2012. “‘P’atches Don’t Have Gender’: What Is Not Open in Open Source Software.” New Media & Society 14 (4): 669–683. doi:10.1177/1461444811422887.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perng, S.-Y. forthcoming. “Hackathons and the Practices and Possibilities of Participation.” In The Right to the Smart City, edited by R. Kitchin, P. Cardullo, and C. D. Feliciantonio, 135–149. Bingley: Emerald.
   Google Scholar
• Perng, S.-Y., and R. Kitchin. 2018. “Solutions and Frictions in Civic Hacking: Collaboratively Designing and Building Wait Time Predictions for an Immigration Office.” Social & Cultural Geography 19 (1): 1–20. doi:10.1080/14649365.2016.1247193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perng, S.-Y., R. Kitchin, and D. M. Donncha. 2018. “Hackathons, Entrepreneurial Life and the Making of Smart Cities.” Geoforum 97: 189–197. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.08.024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pink, S., V. Fors, and G. Mareike. 2018. “The Contingent Futures of the Mobile Present: Automation as Possibility.” Mobilities 13 (5): 615–631. doi:10.1080/17450101.2018.1436672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, A. 2016. “Hacking in the Public Interest: Authority, Legitimacy, Means, and Ends.” New Media & Society 18 (4): 600–616. doi:10.1177/1461444816629470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purcell, M. 2017. “The City Is Ours (If We Decide It Is).” In Our Digital Rights to the City, edited by J. Shaw and M. Graham, 30–33. London: Meatspace Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosner, D. K., and S. E. Fox. 2016. “Legacies of Craft and the Centrality of Failure in a Mother-Operated Hackerspace.” New Media & Society 18 (4): 558–580. doi:10.1177/1461444816629468.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosner, D. K., S. Lindtner, I. Erickson, L. Forlano, S. Jackson, and B. Kolko. 2014. Making Cultures: Building Things & Building Communities. Baltimore, MD: Association for Computing Machinery.
   Google Scholar
• Schrock, A. R. 2016. “Civic Hacking as Data Activism and Advocacy: A History from Publicity to Open Government Data.” New Media & Society 18 (4): 581–599. doi:10.1177/1461444816629469.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, J., and M. Graham. 2017. “An Informational Right to the City? Code, Content, Control, and the Urbanization of Information.” Antipode 49 (4): 907–927. doi:10.1111/anti.v49.4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Söderberg, J. 2008. Hacking Capitalism: The Free and Open Source Software Movement. NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Starbird, K., and L. Palen. 2011. “‘Voluntweeters’: Self-Organizing by Digital Volunteers in Times of Crisis”. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, Canada, 1071–1080.
   Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw, E. 2011. Designing the Post-Political City and the Insurgent Polis. London: Bedford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thrift, N. 2011. “Lifeworld Inc—And What to Do about It.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 29 (1): 5–26. doi:10.1068/d0310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toupin, S. 2014. “Feminist Hackerspaces: The Synthesis of Feminist and Hacker Cultures.” Journal of Peer Production, 5. http://peerproduction.net/editsuite/issues/issue-5-shared-machine-shops/peer-reviewed-articles/feminist-hackerspaces-the-synthesis-of-feminist-and-hacker-cultures/
   Google Scholar
• Tsing, A. L. 2016. The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins. Princeton, NJ: Princetion University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Urry, J. 2013. Societies beyond Oil: Oil Dregs and Social Futures. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Urry, J. 2016. What Is the Future? Cambridge: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Zandbergen, D. 2017. “‘We are Sensemakers’: The (Anti-)Politics of Smart City Co-Creation.” Public Culture 29 (3 83): 539–562. doi:10.1215/08992363-3869596.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar