ist machine and so to a better understanding of how
this machine can interoperate with fashion.
Another aspect of the Grecian approach to the ma-
chine can give us as to how it works on a small scale.
They believed that every possible technical device
could be created out of a combination of six elements
or functions and by combining the lever, the screw,
the inclined plane, the wedge, the wheel, and the pul-
ley, any type of machine could be constructed. In this
sense mechanisms were building blocks, generators
or agents of specific functions, and from the interac-
tion of these simple building blocks advanced sys-
tems could be formed. This aspect of the Grecian
machine is on a parallel with those of the complexity
theoretician John Holland when he compares these
basic functions with the simple rules of building
emergent and highly complex systems (Holland
2000). For example, the limited intelligence of a mil-
lion ants can form extremely complex anthills with-
out any leader or coordinator. The abstract machines,
according to Deleuze and Guattari are a combination
of all these aforementioned machine aspects. They
can be simple theories, logics or functions, but it is
through their strong mutual interoperation that
emergent phenomena arise, phenomena that are
larger than the sum of its parts.
Deleuze and Guattari specify the application of the
abstract machines to be the engineering diagrams that
guide the processes of becoming, of stemming from in-
between lines. The machines are thus something very
different from a structure or a mechanical machine
but rather a form of intangible logic undergoing
continuous change. They are imminent and definite-
ly not transcendental.
There is no abstract machine, or machines, in the
sense of a Platonic Idea, transcendent, universal,
eternal. [...] Abstract machines consist of unformed
matters and nonformal functions. Every abstract
machine is a consolidated aggregate of matter-func-
tions (phylum and diagram). (D&G 2004:562)The machine is not an essence or a dominant logic. It
is neither a guiding process from “above”, as an ideol-
ogy, nor from “within”, as a psychological essence of
man, as for example the homo eoconomicus (DeLanda
2006). Rather it grows from the space between every
line, from every singular meeting with another, from
every transaction between persons, between every
word in a sentence, and every time a simple cell rep-
licates itself.
It is important to bear in mind that the abstract ma-
chine cannot be limited to a “mindset” such as that
of a purely human agency, of something that only
happens inside the mind. The abstract machine
works on several levels, and the human agent is just
one of many morphogenetic processes. The format
of code, the circuitry of the computer, the frequency
of electric current, the differentiation and distribu-
tion of material flows and so on, all play an equal
part. Nor is that all. For Deleuze and Guattari it is,
for example, the same abstract machine that creates
social hierarchies in society, or centralized national
capitals, that lies behind the formation of sediment-
ed sandstone in nature (D&G 2004, DeLanda 1997).
It is not necessary to undertake a further exploration
of this complex discussion here, but what is impor-
tant to keep in mind is that the ”mindset” of human
agents is only as important as the property of matter
or the fluidity of energy, as they are all a part of the
intrinsic process conducted by the same abstract
machine.
Regarding the culture of hacking I will go into this
process at a later point, but I can already mention
here how they build a complex machine from a few
simple and recurring ideas. Hacking is not reducible
to any one of the isolated parts, but its mechanism is
built from the interaction and intensification of sev-
eral functions that are quite similar to Holland’s dis-
section of the Hellenic machines. Some of these
hacking elements can be the skills for accessing sys-
tems, playing with technology, sharing code, em-
powering users, decentralizing control, and so forth.
As we can see in these elements, the abstract hacking
machine itself embodies some central digital traits,
such as the commands of copy-paste, the loop, the
sample, and the remix. This is true even if it is ap-
plied to non-digital materials or systems, as we will
see in the chapter on hacking. All these functions
happen in between people or matter, and adjust the
way they are put together in an assemblage way. The
application of the hacktivist abstract machine can
not be confined solely to the realm of computers and
we will see how its functions indeed run through an
extremely varied set of practices. However, in order
to better understand why the abstract machine of
hacktivism is especially applicable to present-day so-
ciety, we must look to the science historian Michel
Serres and his ideas concerning machine metaphors
in history.