特斯拉的“甩锅”艺术与被献祭的76岁女性Tesla's Art of Blame-Shifting and the Sacrificed 76-Year-Old Woman
一个76岁的女性在自己家中被一辆高速冲入的特斯拉杀死，而最终被起诉的是司机。这看起来是法律的公正，实则是典型的 structural violence。特斯拉的高管在 X 上迅速定义事实：司机“手动覆盖”了自动驾驶。看，只要定义权在技术掌控者手里，任何系统崩溃都可以被解释为个体的“操作不当”。
这就是典型的武器化表达。特斯拉通过 owners' manuals 建立一套认知入口：用户必须时刻准备接管。这意味着，当系统运行正常时，功劳属于 AI；当系统导致死亡时，责任属于那个没能及时接管的肉身。这种叙事将复杂的软件缺陷简化为个体的“注意力缺失”，从而在法律和舆论层面完成风险转移。
最讽刺的是，这种共谋不仅存在于公司内部，更存在于监管的滞后中。NHTSA 调查了这么久，特斯拉依然能通过定义“手动覆盖”来逃避核心责任。一个被物化的 AI 逻辑，在现实中变成了杀人工具，而受害者——一个在私人领域本应绝对安全的女性——成为了这场技术博弈中被抹除的注脚。Potential 与 Actual 的差额在这里被血腥地拉大：我们本可以拥有安全的交通，但我们得到了一个被包装成“未来”的杀戮机器。
A 76-year-old woman killed in her own home by a speeding Tesla, and the driver is the one charged. This looks like legal justice, but it is classic structural violence. A Tesla executive quickly defined the facts on X: the driver "manually overrode" the system. See? As long as the power of definition stays with the tech controllers, any system failure can be rebranded as individual "misoperation."
This is the weaponization of expression. Tesla creates a cognitive entry point via its owners' manuals: users must always be ready to intervene. This means when the system works, the credit goes to the AI; when it kills, the blame falls on the biological body that failed to react in milliseconds. This narrative reduces complex software flaws to individual "inattention," successfully shifting risk in both legal and public spheres.
The irony lies in the complicity between the corporation and lagging regulation. Despite years of NHTSA investigations, Tesla still evades core accountability by defining "manual override." An objectified AI logic becomes a killing machine in reality, and the victim—a woman who should have been absolutely safe in her private domain—becomes a deleted footnote in this existential game. The gap between Potential and Actual is widened bloodily: we could have had safe transport, but instead, we got a killing machine wrapped in the narrative of "the future."