To conclude, then, personal data often form into imperfect copies of ourselves – doppelgängers.
Those that use data often point to these doppelgängers and treat them as if they are accurate representations of us. In this sense, doppelgängers are also simulacra. This method can, from a myanmar rcs data pragmatic perspective, be useful, and from a social perspective, we should not be so quick to write off the ability of data to extend the realm of our own being. Equally, the doppelgänger is imperfect, and these imperfections can manifest as serious social harms.
I suppose, if there’s a lesson I wish to convey, it is this:
the person is always more than the data would suggest.
And a Note on The End
As I stated at the start of this blog post, this is the final one in this series. I personally try not to make too much fuss about endings, but I have been encouraged to write something. Furthermore, I can see the benefit to the reader of trying to tie a thread through this series together.
Human beings are not data. I think this blogpost makes that clear.
But the relationship between humans and data is difficult, and so-long as some are inclined to think of data and the humans they affect as one in the same, there should probably be an ambition to do something about it.