人工智能摧毁机构
How AI destroys institutions

原始链接: https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/publications/how-ai-destroys-institutions/

## 人工智能对公民机构的威胁 本文认为,当前的人工智能系统对维持民主运作至关重要的核心机构——法治、大学和自由新闻——构成了重大威胁。这些机构依靠演变、透明度、合作和问责制来蓬勃发展,这些都通过人类互动和对共同公民目标的承诺来培养。 然而,作者认为人工智能的内在设计实际上*破坏*了这些品质。人工智能系统侵蚀专业知识,绕过深思熟虑的决策过程,并孤立个体,从而有效地瓦解了机构力量所必需的协作环境。 与建立在信任和合法性基础上的适应性机构不同,人工智能优先考虑效率和产出,而这种方式与公民生活的细微和不断演变本质根本不相容。作者得出结论,正如目前发展,人工智能对这些社会基石构成了严重危险,值得认真考虑。

## AI 与体制衰落:黑客新闻摘要 一篇近期发表的文章(stanford.edu)引发黑客新闻的讨论,认为人工智能正在“摧毁体制”——法治、大学和自由媒体。然而,许多评论员认为人工智能并非衰落的*原因*,而是*加速器*,加剧了原本存在的问题。 几个观点浮出水面:社交媒体已经助长了隔离,而人工智能机器人放大了这种现象;像大学这样的机构已经变得过度关注利润;关键在于,人工智能可能通过提供简单的答案来削弱批判性思维能力。 人们对该论文的方法论提出了担忧,指出它只是草稿,缺乏同行评审,并且依赖于可疑的来源。一些人认为体制已经脆弱,并举例说明了政治操纵和对既定体制信任度下降。另一些人则认为这是“创造性破坏”的自然循环。 最终,这场讨论凸显了人们的担忧,即人工智能虽然潜力巨大,但可能会加剧现有的社会弱点,并侵蚀民主生活的根基。
相关文章

原文

Civic institutions—the rule of law, universities, and a free press—are the backbone of democratic life. They are the mechanisms through which complex societies encourage cooperation and stability, while also adapting to changing circumstances. The real superpower of institutions is their ability to evolve and adapt within a hierarchy of authority and a framework for roles and rules while maintaining legitimacy in the knowledge produced and the actions taken. Purpose-driven institutions built around transparency, cooperation, and accountability empower individuals to take intellectual risks and challenge the status quo. This happens through the machinations of interpersonal relationships within those institutions, which broaden perspectives and strengthen shared commitment to civic goals.

Unfortunately, the affordances of AI systems extinguish these institutional features at every turn. In this essay, we make one simple point: AI systems are built to function in ways that degrade and are likely to destroy our crucial civic institutions. The affordances of AI systems have the effect of eroding expertise, short-circuiting decision-making, and isolating people from each other. These systems are anathema to the kind of evolution, transparency, cooperation, and accountability that give vital institutions their purpose and sustainability. In short, current AI systems are a death sentence for civic institutions, and we should treat them as such.

Authors:
Woodrow Hartzog
Boston University School of Law; Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society
Jessica M. Silbey
Boston University - School of Law

  • Date Published:1.13.2026
联系我们 contact @ memedata.com