This is a critique of how designers deal with temporality in design to speculate about socio-technical futures. The paper unpacks how embedded definitions and assumptions of temporality in current design tools contribute to coloniality in designed futures. Based on this critique, we reject the notion that it is only AI that needs fixing, as design practice becomes implicated in how oppression extends from physical systems to global digital platforms. To make these issues visible, we dissect the Futures Cone model used in speculative design. As an alternative, the paper then presents hauntology as a vocabulary that can aid designers in accommodating pluriversal histories in anticipatory futures and reorienting their speculative tools. To illustrate the benefits of the proposed metaphors, the paper highlights examples of coloniality in digital spaces and emphasizes the failure of speculative design to decolonize future imaginaries. Using points of reference from hauntology, ones that engage with states of lingering or spectrality, and notions of nostalgia, absence, and anticipation, the paper contributes to rethinking the role that design tools play in colonizing future imaginaries, especially those pertaining to potentially disruptive technologies.

@en

The Sensing in the Wild Lab is a speculative experiment in designing a de- centralised urban sensing system from a more-than-human perspective. It is part of DCODE, an H2020-ITN project that explores the future of designing with AI. During the Lab participants assume different identities – roleplaying as children but also as moss, as municipal authorities, as CCTV cameras, as pigeons, and as undocumented immigrants trying to evade the authorities – and are asked to feed into the sensing system data that reflects their particular perspectives and interests. The data partici- pants share, in the form of an image and text uploaded to a dedicated WhatsApp channel, helps to reveal both frictions and alignments among actors. In this, the Lab offers municipalities an opportunity to shift their thinking about the future smart city from a “system of systems” that is optimised for a few city dwellers to a much more distributed, inclusive meshwork in which data is contributed, circulated, and negoti- ated by humans and nonhumans alike.@en