"The global enterprise solutions provider SAP rebranded itself in 2010 with a rather curious byline: “In a Clear New World You Can See Far into the Present”. At first, this appears intuitive—greater analytics equates with efficiency, foreknowledge of future trends, the ability to anticipate consumer and production demands and to modify supply chains, all the those supposed benefits that sustain the general discourse of “smartness”, big data, and high-technology managed logistics. On second consideration, however, the SAP ad is quite unintuitive, even offensive, to its client base. This ad campaign openly admits that human perception, and human intelligence, simply cannot comprehend the systems we manage. In turn, SAP invokes a notion of an eternally extendable real-time or present, one with a sort of in-built futurity, the actual contours and teleology of which is never specified. This suggestion of the future-present (a “deep” present one can see “far” into), combined with this transparency that sees nothing (in the ad, in fact, one cannot see much in all the bright light of the window), justifies the penetration of computing into the lived environment as a solution to the problem of the human inability to “see” or know the systems we supposedly manage and the futures that we need to create. SAP’s advertising embraces the infinite invisibility but operability of our logistical infrastructures."
Intrigued by (have never thought about) the idea of a Deep Present. Though kinda obvious-after-the-fact, I guess, LOL. Infrastructural invisibility (and stactivist counter-measures / gambits) are something that interest me - declouding The 'Cloud', etc. I'm pretty thick / never dun philustophy at skool, but doesn't the idea of Deep Presents and Deep Pasts suggest a sort of return to a 'Structuralist' approach - the idea of levels / 'depths' to ideas / concepts / abstractions? But, then, doesn't Big Data itself represent a sort of TechnoStructuralism, that informational levels / depths can be uncovered / mined / even used to project and extrapolate meanings that were not implicitly visible on the surface? But, hey, I dunno...
Love this bit:
"Despite needing machines to provide intelligence, and no longer being able to make decisions, humans appear eager to embrace this situation. As the architect Jesse LeCavalier has artfully noted, and the corporation United Parcel Services makes explicit, “We Love Logistics”. This “love”, an icon not even denoted in language, encapsulates the fact that logistics are un-representable, and satisfy—if not automate—our desires by answering every demand of consumption with ever greater responsiveness and supply chain flexibility."