of Microsoft Word’s and Adobe Acrobat’s concrete mechanisms for tracking authorship, at both the level of algorithms and the code itself; and an analysis of manuals used to train criminal forensics experts on tracing identity – and criminal accountability – through metadata. Both historical and hypothetical examples are used to demonstrate the surprising (and terrifying) possibilities of this single metadata field – simultaneously updating the concept of the author-function in an era of automated authorship, while also teasing out the politics of a metadata field that few of us are even aware of. But sometimes, the tactics came together in less illuminating ways. The book occasionally seems to get so bogged down in the materiality of computation that it cannot raise itself back to its lofty goal of enacting a ‘critical and inventive politics’. For example, Chapter 7 (‘Computational Aesthetics’) dwells so much on aspects of the computational – discreteness, axiomatics, numbers, speeds, scale – that it fails to say anything novel about how these inform and constitute aesthetic works and experiences. But maybe it was just me. As a reader who focuses on human–computer interaction (HCI), design, and philosophical and literary aesthetics, I am aware of sophisticated debates about the topics that Fazi and Fuller were raising and was disappointed that the chapter did not go further than it did. At the same time, I recognise that the chapter achieves a level of technico-material precision that researchers of digital art often do not; possibly, this chapter might heighten the sensitivities of such scholars to the materiality of the art. It is not surprising that different readers might have wildly different responses to chapters because software studies engage ‘texts, ideas, objects, and systems from computer science and digital technologies in dialogue with those of cultural theory, digital media cultures, art, hacking, and elsewhere’ (p. 4). Who among us is equally strong with all of these? There but for the grace of Google go I. Perhaps, then, the best way to read this book is to soak in its surprising connections and the ways of reading, thinking and acting that they open up. The book is especially strong when it gets down and dirty with the materiality of specific systems – when it does, it is like reading the finest literary or film criticism. Examples of this include the book’s running emphasis on videogames (like Minecraft) and digital play (see, especially, Chapter 6, ‘Always One Bit More’) and online archives, such as GitHub (see Chapter 4, ‘Big Diff, Granularity, and Production in the Github Software Repository’). Another strength is the book’s revitalisation (as opposed to mere application) of critical theories and computing histories: Gilles Deleuze, Mikhail Bakhtin and Donna Haraway are read side by side with Alan Turing, Norbert Weiner and Mark Weiser. The collective power of these analyses – even more than the book’s accessible and engaging introduction – makes the case that software studies is highly relevant and, indeed, desperately needed in today’s condition of geek tragedy.

中文翻译：

---

书评：矛盾的互联网：恶作剧、奇怪和对抗在线 PhillipsWhitneyMilnerRyan M，矛盾的互联网：在线恶作剧、怪异和对抗剑桥：政治出版社，2017 年，240 页；ISBN 9781509501274，ISBN 9781509501267，69.95 美元（精装本），ISBN 9781509501274，24.95 美元（平装本），ISBN 9781509501304，19.99 美元（epub）

Microsoft Word 和 Adob​​e Acrobat 跟踪作者身份的具体机制，包括算法和代码本身；以及用于培训刑事取证专家通过元数据追踪身份和刑事责任的手册的分析。历史和假设的例子都被用来展示这个单一元数据领域令人惊讶（和可怕）的可能性——同时更新作者功能的概念在自动化作者时代，同时也梳理了元数据领域的政治，很少有人我们甚至都知道。但有时，这些策略以不太有启发性的方式结合在一起。这本书有时似乎陷入了计算的重要性，以至于无法将自己提升到制定“批判性和创造性的政治”的崇高目标。例如，第 7 章（“计算美学”）过多地讨论了计算的各个方面——离散性、公理、数字、速度、规模——它没有说任何关于这些如何通知和构成美学作品和体验的新颖之处。但也许这只是我。作为一个关注人机交互 (HCI)、设计、哲学和文学美学的读者，我知道关于 Fazi 和 Fuller 提出的主题的复杂辩论，并对本章没有比它更进一步感到失望. 同时，我认识到这一章达到了数字艺术研究人员通常无法达到的技术材料精确度；或许，本章可能会提高这些学者对艺术的重要性的敏感度。毫不奇怪，不同的读者可能对章节有截然不同的反应，因为软件研究将“来自计算机科学和数字技术的文本、思想、对象和系统与文化理论、数字媒体文化、艺术、黑客和其他地方”（第 4 页）。我们当中谁在所有这些方面都同样强大？如果没有谷歌的恩典，我就去吧。也许，阅读这本书的最佳方式就是沉浸在它令人惊讶的联系以及它们打开的阅读、思考和行动方式中。当它被特定系统的物质性弄脏和弄脏时，这本书尤其强大——当它发生时，就像阅读最好的文学或电影评论一样。这方面的例子包括本书对电子游戏（如 Minecraft）和数字游戏（尤其参见第 6 章，'Always One Bit More'）和在线存档，例如 GitHub（请参阅第 4 章，“Github 软件存储库中的大差异、粒度和生产”）。本书的另一个优势是对批判理论和计算历史的复兴（而不是仅仅应用）：吉尔·德勒兹、米哈伊尔·巴赫金和唐娜·哈拉威与艾伦·图灵、诺伯特·韦纳和马克·魏泽并排阅读。这些分析的集体力量——甚至比本书通俗易懂且引人入胜的介绍更重要——使得软件研究具有高度相关性，并且确实在当今极客悲剧的条件下迫切需要。本书的另一个优势是对批判理论和计算历史的复兴（而不是仅仅应用）：吉尔·德勒兹、米哈伊尔·巴赫金和唐娜·哈拉威与艾伦·图灵、诺伯特·韦纳和马克·魏泽并排阅读。这些分析的集体力量——甚至比本书通俗易懂且引人入胜的介绍更重要——使得软件研究具有高度相关性，并且确实在当今极客悲剧的条件下迫切需要。本书的另一个优势是对批判理论和计算历史的复兴（而不是仅仅应用）：吉尔·德勒兹、米哈伊尔·巴赫金和唐娜·哈拉威与艾伦·图灵、诺伯特·韦纳和马克·魏泽并排阅读。这些分析的集体力量——甚至比本书通俗易懂且引人入胜的介绍更重要——使得软件研究具有高度相关性，并且在当今极客悲剧的条件下确实是迫切需要的。