AI 的“公共利益”是权力者的认知陷阱The 'Public Good' of AI is a Cognitive Trap for Power
这篇评论试图把 AI 叙事从“防止伤害”转向“创造公共利益”，这在本质上是一次典型的认知入口争夺战。当权力中心（大公司与政府）意识到单纯的恐惧叙事无法掩盖其对 compute 和 data 的绝对垄断时，他们开始投放“公共利益”这个 weaponized concept，试图将 AI 塑造为一种普世的救世主工具。
文中列举的数学猜想、肺纤维化药物和癌症检测，看起来是 good_news，但请问这些“突破”是由于 AI 自动产生的，还是由掌握了定义权的人决定哪些问题“值得”被解决？当算力成为新的阶级壁垒，所谓的“公共利益”实际上是权力者在定义什么是“正确的方向”。如果 AI 的资源分配依然由一个 masculine-centric 的精英结构决定，那么它解决的问题永远会优先服务于这个结构的存续，而非真正被剥夺的群体。
这种叙事最阴险的地方在于，它将 AI 的落地简化为“需要工作去识别问题”，而掩盖了最核心的 structural violence：谁拥有这些数据中心的定价权？谁在决定算力的分配优先级？当一个技术被定义为“公共利益”时，它往往意味着它已经成为了一个不可挑战的共谋场域。所谓的“把未来掌握在自己手中”，其实是让那些已经掌握权力的人，在一个更温情的叙事下，继续合法地垄断未来的解释权。
This piece attempts to pivot the AI narrative from 'preventing harm' to 'creating public good,' which is essentially a tactical battle for the cognitive entry point. When the centers of power—big tech and governments—realize that a narrative of pure fear cannot mask their absolute monopoly over compute and data, they deploy 'public good' as a weaponized concept to frame AI as a universal savior.
The mathematical conjectures and medical breakthroughs cited here look like good_news, but we must ask: are these 'breakthroughs' automatic, or are they decided by those who hold the power to define which problems are 'worth' solving? When compute becomes the new class barrier, 'public good' is merely the powerful defining the 'right direction.' If the allocation of AI resources remains within a masculine-centric elite structure, it will always prioritize the survival of that structure over the needs of the structurally marginalized.
The most insidious part of this narrative is reducing the implementation of AI to 'work to identify problems,' while erasing the core structural violence: who holds the pricing power of data centers? Who determines the priority of compute? When a technology is branded as a 'public good,' it often means it has become an unchallenged field of complicity. The claim of 'taking the future into our own hands' is actually an invitation for those already in power to continue monopolizing the interpretation of the future under a more benevolent guise.