Dmitry Muravyov
info
Please Note
<p>This page displays the records of the person named above and is not linked to a unique person identifier. This record may need to be merged to a profile.</p>
5 records found
1
Governing by dismantling
Tech oligarchy and the stifling of public data infrastructure
Journal article
(2026)
-
Louis Ravn, Bokar N'Diaye, Katie Mackinnon, Nanna Bonde Thylstrup, Dmitry Muravyov
Moments of Reading
Making Meaning Through Design and Philosophy
This chapter explores the intersection between philosophy and design in addressing political and sociotechnical challenges, particularly the role of AI in democratic societies. Philosophical reflection in technological design is often limited to post-development audits, reducing its potential impact. We argue for a non-hierarchical, co-creative relationship between philosophy and design that expands the conceptual space for interventions. Using the "Moments of Reading" workshop, held in 2023 within the AI DeMoS Lab at TU Delft, we explore how philosophy and design can co-generate knowledge by collectively articulating complex concepts like AI, democracy, and design. The workshop employed a card-based method to prompt participants into exploring the fluidity of these terms, highlighting how conceptual work in philosophy and material practice in design can mutually reinvigorate each other. By reframing philosophical reflection as a participatory and relational practice, we move away from rigid, pre-defined identities in stakeholder engagement. Instead, we advocate for a flexible, interpretative approach that values non-identity as a guiding principle for conceptual articulation. Ultimately, this chapter offers a model of doing philosophy through design, emphasizing collective material practices that reimagine how we approach the ethical and political dimensions of AI in democratic societies.
...
This chapter explores the intersection between philosophy and design in addressing political and sociotechnical challenges, particularly the role of AI in democratic societies. Philosophical reflection in technological design is often limited to post-development audits, reducing its potential impact. We argue for a non-hierarchical, co-creative relationship between philosophy and design that expands the conceptual space for interventions. Using the "Moments of Reading" workshop, held in 2023 within the AI DeMoS Lab at TU Delft, we explore how philosophy and design can co-generate knowledge by collectively articulating complex concepts like AI, democracy, and design. The workshop employed a card-based method to prompt participants into exploring the fluidity of these terms, highlighting how conceptual work in philosophy and material practice in design can mutually reinvigorate each other. By reframing philosophical reflection as a participatory and relational practice, we move away from rigid, pre-defined identities in stakeholder engagement. Instead, we advocate for a flexible, interpretative approach that values non-identity as a guiding principle for conceptual articulation. Ultimately, this chapter offers a model of doing philosophy through design, emphasizing collective material practices that reimagine how we approach the ethical and political dimensions of AI in democratic societies.
Designing with Fallibility
Examining the Knowledge Politics of Agency, Methods, and Motivations in Robot Failure Research
A line of research in HCI and HRI has started to consider robot failures, errors, and breakdowns not as problems to be eliminated, but as opportunities to inform and enrich design. This shift has led to growing interest in how robotic fallibility affects user trust, interaction quality, and system acceptance. In this paper, we inquire into what it means to design with fallibility. Drawing on feminist technoscience, we examine how current approaches frame the roles of designers and users (agency), how research methods shape the phenomena they study (performativity), and how underlying research goals carry ethical and epistemological implications (motivation). In recognizing robotic fallibility as a sociotechnical phenomenon and design research as a world-making practice, we provide design considerations that promote more reflexive, inclusive, and politically aware engagements with (robot) failure in HRI and HCI.
...
A line of research in HCI and HRI has started to consider robot failures, errors, and breakdowns not as problems to be eliminated, but as opportunities to inform and enrich design. This shift has led to growing interest in how robotic fallibility affects user trust, interaction quality, and system acceptance. In this paper, we inquire into what it means to design with fallibility. Drawing on feminist technoscience, we examine how current approaches frame the roles of designers and users (agency), how research methods shape the phenomena they study (performativity), and how underlying research goals carry ethical and epistemological implications (motivation). In recognizing robotic fallibility as a sociotechnical phenomenon and design research as a world-making practice, we provide design considerations that promote more reflexive, inclusive, and politically aware engagements with (robot) failure in HRI and HCI.
Journal article
(2025)
-
Olya Kudina, Joost Mollen, Jordi Viader Guerrero, Dmitry Muravyov, Juan Pablo Bermudez
This paper proposes and reflects on a teaching methodology for introducing relational ethics in the engineering curriculum based on a pilot at TU Delft in the Netherlands in a course for robotics engineers. Differently from prevalent models of ethics courses, we shifted from having students apply ethical theories to technologies to having them reflect on different aspects of human-robot relations from a more-than-human perspective. This redesign was prompted by conceptual and practical motivations related to (1) a lack of methodological examples of relational ethics in engineering ethics education, (2) a call for more experiential education, and (3) a push to re-evaluate course assessment due to Generative AI. Aside from the lecture content, students explored various dimensions of relational ethics in a thinking-through-doing manner by crafting a companion robot in the tutorials. This culminated in an individual essay in which students reflected on the question ‘How to live well with robots?,’ reflecting on their developing relations with their robotic companion and supported by visual evidence of their human-robot interactions throughout the course. Finally, we provide reflections on this experimental course redesign, outlining several considerations for those intending to integrate relational ethics into their curricula and suggesting avenues for further work.
...
This paper proposes and reflects on a teaching methodology for introducing relational ethics in the engineering curriculum based on a pilot at TU Delft in the Netherlands in a course for robotics engineers. Differently from prevalent models of ethics courses, we shifted from having students apply ethical theories to technologies to having them reflect on different aspects of human-robot relations from a more-than-human perspective. This redesign was prompted by conceptual and practical motivations related to (1) a lack of methodological examples of relational ethics in engineering ethics education, (2) a call for more experiential education, and (3) a push to re-evaluate course assessment due to Generative AI. Aside from the lecture content, students explored various dimensions of relational ethics in a thinking-through-doing manner by crafting a companion robot in the tutorials. This culminated in an individual essay in which students reflected on the question ‘How to live well with robots?,’ reflecting on their developing relations with their robotic companion and supported by visual evidence of their human-robot interactions throughout the course. Finally, we provide reflections on this experimental course redesign, outlining several considerations for those intending to integrate relational ethics into their curricula and suggesting avenues for further work.
Doubt to be certain
Epistemological ambiguity of data in the case of grassroots mapping of traffic accidents in Russia
While the prevalent view positions data as an objective and unbiased resource of truth about the world, scholars have noted that this understanding cannot be all-encompassing and data activists may comprehend the relationship between knowledge, reality, and data differently. Data activists are civil society actors with a critical stance towards datafication; they either consider data as a political issue or employ it to advance desirable social change. This article investigates activists’ data epistemologies in a twofold manner. First, it poses the question of how activists can simultaneously use a certain dataset while questioning its credibility. Second, the article explores how activists’ data epistemology transforms other domains of socio-political grassroots interventions. To answer these questions, I turn to the case of the DTP Map–an interactive geoweb map of traffic accidents in Russia made by activists using the official governmental data. Turning to the concept of contentious data politics, I demonstrate how the project transforms by continuously dealing with the data’s epistemologically ambiguous nature. In their data practices aimed at gaining and maintaining the users’ trust, activists have tried to ensure their project will be employed by various collectives for the common goal of reducing traffic accidents in Russia. Their data practices can be considered both a repertoire of social change and a stake of activist intervention. Crucially, in the process of map-making, activists do not gain the epistemologically unambiguous view of data but rather they manage to retain this ambiguity and make it a constitutive part of their project.
...
While the prevalent view positions data as an objective and unbiased resource of truth about the world, scholars have noted that this understanding cannot be all-encompassing and data activists may comprehend the relationship between knowledge, reality, and data differently. Data activists are civil society actors with a critical stance towards datafication; they either consider data as a political issue or employ it to advance desirable social change. This article investigates activists’ data epistemologies in a twofold manner. First, it poses the question of how activists can simultaneously use a certain dataset while questioning its credibility. Second, the article explores how activists’ data epistemology transforms other domains of socio-political grassroots interventions. To answer these questions, I turn to the case of the DTP Map–an interactive geoweb map of traffic accidents in Russia made by activists using the official governmental data. Turning to the concept of contentious data politics, I demonstrate how the project transforms by continuously dealing with the data’s epistemologically ambiguous nature. In their data practices aimed at gaining and maintaining the users’ trust, activists have tried to ensure their project will be employed by various collectives for the common goal of reducing traffic accidents in Russia. Their data practices can be considered both a repertoire of social change and a stake of activist intervention. Crucially, in the process of map-making, activists do not gain the epistemologically unambiguous view of data but rather they manage to retain this ambiguity and make it a constitutive part of their project.