用五步框架反思AI是否该建,避免技术解决社会问题的误区。
Ask before you Build: Rethinking AI-for-Good in Human Trafficking Interventions
- 提出'激进提问'框架,先评估是否该建AI,再谈设计
- 案例显示:避免监控式干预,转向支持幸存者工具
- 适合关注伦理、系统性不公的AI研究者和实践者
AI for good 项目常假设技术能解决复杂社会问题。在人口贩卖(HT)领域,这种技术解决方案主义可能简化剥削本质,强化权力失衡,并对目标社区造成伤害。本文提出‘激进提问’(RQ)框架,作为五步预项目伦理评估工具,批判性地判断在涉及边缘群体与深层结构性不公的领域中,是否应构建AI。RQ不替代伦理原则,而是前置的思辨空间,用于质疑假设、厘清权力关系、评估潜在伤害。通过一个面向人口贩卖的案例研究,RQ揭示了被忽视的社会文化复杂性,引导我们避开以监控为核心的干预,转而发展支持幸存者的工具。尽管针对人口贩卖开发,其五步结构可推广至其他领域,但具体问题需依情境调整。本文将RQ置于更广泛的AI伦理哲学中,挑战工具理性规范,强调关系性与反思性责任。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
AI for good initiatives often rely on the assumption that technical interventions can resolve complex social problems. In the context of human trafficking (HT), such techno-solutionism risks oversimplifying exploitation, reinforcing power imbalances and causing harm to the very communities AI claims to support. In this paper, we introduce the Radical Questioning (RQ) framework as a five step, pre-project ethical assessment tool to critically evaluate whether AI should be built at all, especially in domains involving marginalized populations and entrenched systemic injustice. RQ does not replace principles based ethics but precedes it, offering an upstream, deliberative space to confront assumptions, map power, and consider harms before design. Using a case study in AI for HT, we demonstrate how RQ reveals overlooked sociocultural complexities and guides us away from surveillance based interventions toward survivor empowerment tools. While developed in the context of HT, RQ's five step structure can generalize to other domains, though the specific questions must be contextual. This paper situates RQ within a broader AI ethics philosophy that challenges instrumentalist norms and centers relational, reflexive responsibility.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。