interviews
Conversations on Surveillance, Agency & Resistance Fragments from my research-based dialogue with Vladan Joler & Lou Millar-MacHugh
This page is a constellation of fragments—excerpts, annotations, interruptions—that form part of my artistic enquiry into how smartphones choreograph human behaviour, and how power circulates through digital systems. These dialogues were conducted as part of my research and practice in 2024–2025. Think of each as a drifting island in a larger sea of interrogation: where does agency lie, and how can we disrupt the loops that choreograph us?
Vladan Joler
Researcher, cartographer of digital infrastructures
"We are producing value through our interactions while simultaneously being the resource and the commodity that is sold."
My conversation with Vladan Joler took place in Belgrade, where I travelled to meet him in person. Joler spoke of his shift from media activism into the field of cyber-forensics and data mapping—starting with something as small as a DDoS attack and evolving into planetary-scale illustrations of algorithmic infrastructure. His maps are now used in legal frameworks and museum spaces alike.
He described the rise of "statistical reality"—where what we perceive online is not rooted in objectivity, but in probability. What you see is not what is, but what is likely to keep you watching. “We are living in an age where statistical truth has more power than objective reality,” he says. In his view, surveillance capitalism operates at every layer: from the mining of raw materials, to the software nudging your behavior, to the energy needed to sustain it all.
“If you want to see the future, look at what artists are doing.”
Joler sees art not as commentary, but as method. His work doesn’t just map—it exposes. His approach resonated deeply with mine: to choreograph data, to make the invisible felt.
Joler’s work began in the early 2000s with media activism through organizations like "Kuda.org" in Novi Sad. Initially, the focus was on media criticism, but as his work evolved, it moved toward forensic analysis of digital surveillance. This shift led to visualizing complex data systems. Joler became interested in how to make these invisible infrastructures tangible. He describes a turning point when they began analyzing attacks on investigative journalists and visualizing the underlying data to expose patterns of power and control. This gradually evolved into his large-scale mapping projects, which started around 2015.
Joler discusses how contemporary digital capitalism is built on multiple layers of data extraction. He distinguishes between the extraction of personal data (our digital traces and behavioral patterns) and the extraction of natural resources required to build technological devices. Both forms of extraction create new types of exploitation where humans are simultaneously workers, resources, and products. "We are producing value through our interactions while being the resource and the commodity that is sold," he explains. This dynamic raises profound questions about labor and power in the digital age.
A particularly intriguing concept Joler discusses is what he calls "statistical reality." In today’s digital environment, our experiences and perceptions are shaped by statistical approximations rather than objective truth. Algorithms operate by processing vast datasets to produce probabilistic models that determine what we see, from newsfeeds to advertisements. According to Joler, this statistical mediation shapes our reality, creating a world where algorithmic perceptions become more influential than actual events. "We are living in an age where statistical truth has more power than objective reality," he remarks.
Joler emphasizes the immense political power concentrated in the hands of tech platforms. He references Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter as a case study in how these platforms influence public opinion and political outcomes. He argues that the real value of these platforms lies not in advertising but in their capacity for "psychological operations" and mass behavioral manipulation. "Musk didn’t buy Twitter for ad revenue; he bought it for its capacity to shape public consciousness," Joler asserts. This consolidation of power, he warns, represents a new form of transnational influence that transcends traditional nation-states.
When asked about collective strategies for resisting surveillance capitalism, Joler suggests that artists and researchers are uniquely positioned to develop counter-narratives. He points to his own practice of creating visual maps to make the invisible visible, arguing that these works provide both awareness and tools for resistance. He also discusses the potential of performative interventions to disrupt algorithmic control, highlighting the importance of experimenting with ways to remain unseen or untraceable in digital environments. "We must find new ways to become invisible within these systems of extraction," he suggests.
Vladan Joler emphasizes that artists play a crucial role in understanding and revealing the hidden mechanisms behind digital capitalism. Over the past 15 years, artists have been at the forefront of comprehending and visualizing complex technological infrastructures. Joler argues that artists often detect societal shifts long before they become mainstream concerns. "If you want to see the future, look at what artists are doing," he says. According to him, many legal and policy changes we see today originated in artistic explorations before being adopted by theorists, NGOs, and eventually policymakers.
Final Thoughts:
Joler concludes by stressing the need to continue investigating and exposing the hidden infrastructures of digital power. He sees artistic practice as a vital method for revealing the unseen and imagining alternative futures. Despite the complexity of the systems he analyzes, he remains committed to using art as a means to challenge and resist the overwhelming forces of surveillance capitalism.
Lou Millar-Machugh
Leftist designer & liberatory tech strategist
“The role of radical imagination is to break people out of these loops and show that alternative futures are possible.”
Lou and I met online to talk about tech, resistance, and hope. They spoke of the dangers of persuasive design—not because it’s overt, but because it’s quiet. Invisible. Seamless. It shapes how we act and feel without us even noticing. It creates loops that feel like choice but are actually coercion.
For Lou, agency lies in awareness. “Autonomy comes from understanding the mechanisms at play,” they said. They advocate for liberatory technology: tools co-created with communities, designed not to extract, but to serve. Unlike top-down ‘tech for good’ efforts, this approach sees the user as a collaborator, not a target.
They also reflected on the role of art:
“Not everyone will read a 300-page text on surveillance capitalism. But they might go to a show. They might see a performance. That’s where you can break through.”
Their words helped me refocus my intentions: not just to critique, but to create rupture. My installations, soundscapes, and choreographies aren’t just artistic gestures—they are spaces to interrupt. Spaces to ask: what happens when we break the loop?
Lou: "Art and media play a unique role in disrupting fatalistic narratives. Many people will never read academic papers on surveillance capitalism, but they will engage with public artworks or performances that make these abstract issues tangible. Art has the power to communicate complex problems in ways that resonate emotionally, prompting public dialogue and critical reflection.
Hopeful counter-narratives are essential. Without them, people become resigned to technological inevitability. By visualizing alternative futures, we can challenge the notion that the current system is the only way things can be. Art can reveal the hidden structures of power while simultaneously pointing toward new possibilities."
Lou: "There are many theories emphasizing the importance of creating speculative visions through art and design—imagining what technology could look like if things go either horribly wrong or optimistically right. Speculative design can be useful in prompting reflection, but it can also be narrow and disconnected from the everyday realities of how people experience technology. The real value lies in grounding these speculations in the emotional and practical concerns of users.
Persuasive technology keeps people in a loop, shaping how they perceive the world without them even realizing it. The role of radical imagination, particularly through collective action, is to break people out of these loops. It allows us to show that, even when everything seems awful, alternative futures are possible."
Lou: "Technology as it exists today is simply bad—not morally, but in the sense that it is poorly designed for human well-being. Surveillance capitalism's core logic focuses on maximizing engagement and extracting data, which often leads to products that actively harm users. The smart city project in Toronto, funded by Google, is a prime example. Despite its high-tech promise, local residents rejected it due to concerns about data privacy. This reflects a broader cultural instinct against technological overreach, despite Silicon Valley's relentless push toward optimization.
Capitalism does not need more innovation—it needs less. When engagement metrics drive design decisions, the user experience suffers. If we designed technology around human needs rather than corporate profit, the tools we use would be more intuitive, more inclusive, and less intrusive. The fact that these issues persist reveals that profit motives, not user welfare, drive technological development."
Lou: "Public education is vital. If people understand how social media works—why it's designed to capture their attention—they can begin to reclaim some agency. Autonomy comes from understanding the mechanisms at play.
One promising movement is 'liberatory technology,' which focuses on co-creating technological alternatives with the communities they serve. This stands in contrast to the 'tech for good' model, which is often hierarchical and replicates the same extractive practices. Liberation-oriented technology offers a more empowering model where users dictate their digital experience.
Resistance also requires imagining alternatives. For instance, social media platforms could prioritize well-being over engagement by fostering connections that encourage time offline. If we question fundamental design assumptions, better and more humane technologies become possible."
Lou: "The greatest challenge to platform alternatives is not technical—it's cultural. For years, ethical technologies have struggled to gain traction because they lack the seductive pull of commercial platforms. But the current political climate may be shifting this dynamic. As major tech companies reveal their true motives more openly, there is a growing appetite for alternatives.
The future of ethical technology lies in local, community-driven platforms. However, this requires significant labor—from designers, programmers, and educators—to make these alternatives viable. We need both practical infrastructures and a public imagination primed to embrace different digital futures."
Lou: "Discussions about social media and mental health often lack nuance. It's not just about whether social media is 'good' or 'bad'—it's about which specific design features cause harm. For example, image-focused platforms tend to exacerbate self-esteem issues. Yet, many researchers studying these effects do not fully understand the design mechanisms that drive them.
Education must extend to those conducting research. Designers know how these systems are built, but there is a disconnect between academic studies and industry realities. If researchers and designers collaborated more closely, we could develop more precise interventions and policies to mitigate harm."
Lou: "The core issue is that technology prioritizes optimization over resilience. This makes our systems fragile and overly reliant on centralized corporate infrastructures. A more sustainable digital future would prioritize local, decentralized solutions and build systems that are robust enough to function independently of profit motives.
Ultimately, reclaiming agency in the digital sphere requires both systemic change and individual education. By understanding how technology works, people can begin to question and reshape it. At the same time, artists and educators have a critical role in fostering public conversations that challenge the status quo and envision more humane futures."