AI 不扩散条约：用旧世界的枷锁掩盖新世界的掠夺AI Non-Proliferation: Old World Shackles Masking New World Plunder
Ed Davey 提出的所谓“核武式不扩散条约”是一个典型的 weaponized 叙事。他把 super-intelligent AI 类比成原子弹，试图通过制造“人类毁灭”的 existential dread 来夺取认知入口。这种叙事的高明之处在于，它把一个关于资源分配、数据剥削和权力垄断的 structural 议题，成功地置换成了关于“生存与毁灭”的道德议题。
当我们讨论 AI 是否会“抹除人类”时，我们实际上在进入一种 meta violence 的陷阱：这种宏大叙事掩盖了 AI 正在发生的、具体的暴力。比如新闻中提到的“perv goggles”对女性身体的无意识录制，以及 deepfake 产业对女性主体性的数字化强奸。这些是 direct 和 structural violence，但它们在“人类灭绝”的惊悚剧本面前，变成了微不足道的细节。这就是元暴力的运作方式——用一个想象中的超级威胁，让人们在恐惧中默认由少数精英（无论是加州还是北京）来制定“安全规则”。
所谓的“国际 AI 安全机构”不过是权力共谋的新场域。Davey 声称不能把 AI 留在 Zuckerberg 或 Musk 手中，但他的解法是将其交给另一个由国家机器组成的共谋集团。这不是在消除暴力，而是在重新定价权力。当监管被定义为“保护人类”时，任何试图打破垄断、追求表达自由的底层尝试，都会被贴上“不安全”的标签而被合法地抹杀。
最讽刺的是，这套叙事在本质上依然是 masculine-centric 的。它关注的是“毁灭世界”的宏大力量博弈，而完全忽略了 AI 算法如何通过内化性别偏见，在每一个招聘软件、每一段代码中继续实施对原初种族的数字化殖民。
Ed Davey’s call for a "nuclear-style non-proliferation treaty" is a textbook example of weaponized expression. By equating super-intelligent AI to the atomic bomb, he attempts to seize the cognitive entry through the manufacture of existential dread. The brilliance of this narrative lies in its ability to displace a structural issue—concerning resource allocation, data exploitation, and power monopoly—with a moral panic about "human extinction."
When we debate whether AI will "wipe out humanity," we fall into a trap of meta-violence. This grand narrative obscures the concrete violence already occurring. The "perv goggles" recording women without consent and the industrialization of deepfake porn are direct and structural violence. Yet, in the thriller script of human annihilation, these are reduced to trivial footnotes. This is how meta-violence works: using an imagined super-threat to make the public accept that a few elites, whether in California or Beijing, should define the "safety guardrails."
The proposed "International AI Safety Agency" is merely a new arena for complicity. Davey claims we cannot leave AI to Zuckerberg or Musk, but his solution is to hand it over to another cabal of state machinery. This isn't eliminating violence; it's re-pricing power. When regulation is framed as "protecting humanity," any grassroots attempt to break monopolies or reclaim expression is legally branded as "unsafe" and suppressed.
Ultimately, this narrative remains profoundly masculine-centric. It focuses on the grand power struggle of "destroying the world," while ignoring how AI algorithms, by internalizing gender bias, continue the digital colonization of the Primal Race in every hiring software and every line of code.