Rooted in theories of Futures Studies, the project used the
hindsight / insight / foresight methodology alongside the
PPPP cone and the scenario matrix to map where digital identity had come from,
where it was, where it might go, and how it was impacting on self-identity.
Four scenarios for 2050
Possible
Back to the Future: 1984
Humans are categorised under digital groups, having completely lost their self-identity to the system. Digital platforms form their own identities and govern digital groups through machine consciousness.
Plausible
Nosedive
Digital identity has taken over self-identity. Societies are divided into strata according to digital performance. Those without a good digital score lack basic rights. Those without access to digital worlds are completely marginalised.
Probable
The Multiverse
Humans live in parallel realities. Not only actions but feelings and emotions are tracked. A profound self-identity crisis unfolds, driven by decades of digital manipulation. Human agency is at risk.
Preferable
Stairway to Pluriverse
Human data is recognised as a human right. Technological systems adapt to social and ecological systems. Individuals own their data and can navigate digital spaces with security, privacy, and freedom. Human and non-human agencies coexist.
The four scenarios differ in one thing: who controls whether and how the measuring
happens. In the three dystopian scenarios, that control sits outside the individual.
In the preferable scenario, the conditions of measurement are treated as a political
question, where people own the terms on which they can be observed, and human agency
is respected and promoted by technological systems.
This became the design challenge. Following the premise that self-identity is a
right and should be a choice, fl(u)id was the speculation:
How might digital identities respect self-identities?