Datalism and Data Monopolies in the Era of A.I.: A Research Agenda
AI-generated Key Points
- The emergence of data monopolies, known as Datalists, challenges traditional definitions used within Monopoly Capital Theory (MCT)
- Datalists pursue monopolistic control over data rather than traditional market control
- Datalists heavily rely on data about humans and their creative outputs as inputs for AI algorithms
- Humans providing the data are not classified as employees and do not receive compensation or recognition for their labor
- Monopoly theory in economics needs to be reevaluated to incorporate a detailed analysis of the technologies underlying Datalism
- Future research should focus on examining the role of Datalism and its impact on economic activity
- Intangible assets such as digital data and software enable big tech companies to achieve rapid expansion at minimal cost
- The dominant neo-liberal economic paradigm may no longer be sufficient in understanding these new forms of monopolistic control
- Further research is needed to develop a theory of monopoly power that incorporates digital technology and its implications for economic activity
- Understanding Datalism's role is crucial in comprehending how data monopolies operate and their impact on markets and society.
Authors: Catherine E. A. Mulligan, Phil Godsiff
Abstract: The increasing use of data in various parts of the economic and social systems is creating a new form of monopoly: data monopolies. We illustrate that the companies using these strategies, Datalists, are challenging the existing definitions used within Monopoly Capital Theory (MCT). Datalists are pursuing a different type of monopoly control than traditional multinational corporations. They are pursuing monopolistic control over data to feed their productive processes, increasingly controlled by algorithms and Artificial Intelligence (AI). These productive processes use information about humans and the creative outputs of humans as the inputs but do not classify those humans as employees, so they are not paid or credited for their labour. This paper provides an overview of this evolution and its impact on monopoly theory. It concludes with an outline for a research agenda for economics in this space.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.