Résumés
Abstract
Surveillance studies has long drawn on Michel Foucault’s (1977) panopticon and Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s (1987) assemblage to analyse how surveillance functions and its many societal effects. More recently, there has been a particular emphasis on how profiles, otherwise known as data doubles, have played an increased role in surveillance using artificial intelligence. While this scholarship has explored how data are gathered and analysed, this article problematises the ability for the data flowing from humans to machines to be so revelatory of subjectivity. In doing so, this article considers how adopting a psychoanalytical notion of desire, drawn from Jacques Lacan (2007), problematises the assumption that data stemming from outward affirmations of subjectivity are an accurate reflection of who we are. If desire is bound to lack, instead of being an active, positive force, this raises a host of questions about how surveillance is confronted by cuts, blockages, absences, and exclusions when trying to make sense of an individual. As this article argues, this gap of knowledge between profiles and individuals is not because there is a flaw within surveillance but because surveillance itself depends on a constitutive void: the necessary gap of knowledge between data and desire, in light of machines only ever being able to interpret humans as machines. The void of surveillance is not what merely sustains surveillance, as needing to know more to fill a gap of knowledge, but sustains the necessary failure of total surveillance’s goal of knowing everything there is to know about an individual, given there is always more to know. This article shows how paying attention to this void offers new insights into surveillance’s misunderstanding of subjectivity.
Keywords:
- surveillant assemblage,
- Artificial Intelligence,
- profiles,
- psychoanalysis,
- desire,
- Lacan
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Amoore, Louise. 2020. Cloud Ethics: Algorithms and the Attributes of Ourselves and Others. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Amoore, Louise. 2022. Machine Learning Political Orders. Review of International Studies 49 (1): 2–36.
- Ball, Kirstie. 2009. Exposed: The Subject of Surveillance. Information, Communication & Society 12 (5): 639–657.
- Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
- Copjec, Joan. 1994. Read My Desire: Lacan Against the Historicists. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Deleuze, Gilles, and Felix Guattari. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
- Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Books.
- Foucault, Michel. 2003. Society Must Be Defended: Lectures at the Collège De France, 1975–1976. New York: Picador.
- Haggerty, Kevin D., and Richard V. Ericson. 2000. The Surveillant Assemblage. The British Journal of Sociology 51 (4): 605–622.
- Hildebrandt, Mireille. 2013. Profile Transparency By Design? Re-enabling Double Contingency. In Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn: The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Technology, edited by Mireille Hildebrandt and Katja de Vries, 221–246. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
- Joque, Justin. 2017. Deconstruction Machines: Writing in the Age of Cyberwar. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
- Joque, Justin. 2022. Revolutionary Mathematics: Artificial Intelligence, Statistics and the Logic of Capitalism. London: Verso.
- Lacan, Jacques. 1988. The Seminar Book II: The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954–1955. Translated by Sylvana Tomaselli. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Lacan, Jacques. 1998. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: Book XI: The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. Translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
- Lacan, Jacques. 2007. Écrits: A Selection. Translated by Bruce Fink. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
- Lazzarato, Maurizio. 2014. Signs and Machines: Capitalism and the Production of Subjectivity. Los Angeles, CA: Semiotex.
- Rouvroy, Antoinette. 2013. The End(s) of Critique. Data-Behaviourism Versus Due-Process. In Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn: Philosophers of Law Meet Philosophers of Technology, edited by Marielle Hildebrandt and Katja de Vries, 143–168. London: Routledge.
- Rouvroy, Antoinette. 2020. Algorithmic Governmentality and the Death of Politics. The Green European Journal: https://www.greeneuropeanjournal.eu/wp-content/uploads/pdf/algorithmic-governmentality-and-the-death-of-politics.pdf.
- Rouvroy, Antoinette, Lila Athanasiadou, and Goda Klumbyte. 2022. Re-Imagining a “We” Beyond the Gathering of Reductions: Propositions for the Three Ecologies. Footprint 16 (1): 121–134.
- Weiskopf, Richard. 2018. Algorithmic Decision-Making, Spectrogenic Profiling, and Hyper-Facticity in the Age of Post-Truth. Le Foucaldien 6 (1): 1–37.
- Constantaras, Eva, Gabriel Geiger, Justin-Casimir Braun, Dhruv Mehrotra, and Htet Aung. 2023. Inside the Suspicion Machine. Wired and Lighthouse Reports, March 6. https://www.wired.com/story/welfare-state-algorithms [accessed March 18, 2025].
- Zuboff, Shoshana. 2019. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs.

