用哲学视角解析AI生命周期,揭示数据如何自我强化并加剧技术垄断
Futurity as Infrastructure: A Techno-Philosophical Interpretation of the AI Lifecycle
- 引入'未来性'概念,将AI生命周期视为动态生成的递归过程
- 指出当前监管忽视数据在时间与空间中的持续增值效应
- 建议生命周期审计与反递归滥用机制,适合政策制定者与伦理研究者
本文通过技术哲学视角分析欧盟《人工智能法案》,揭示从数据摄入到部署的完整生命周期如何生成递归价值链,挑战现有负责任AI框架。提出一个涵盖数据、训练范式、模型架构、特征存储和迁移学习的分析工具,并基于西蒙东技术哲学重构'个体化'概念,建立包含前个体环境、个体化与已个体化AI的模型。核心观点是:政策缺失对技术运作与经济逻辑背后‘生成过程’的刻画。为此提出‘未来性’——一种自增强的AI生命周期,更多数据提升性能、深化个性化并拓展应用领域。该过程依赖特征存储等基础设施实现反馈、适应与时间回溯,呈现非竞争性数据增殖特性。强调平台寡头通过捕获、训练与部署基础设施集中价值与决策权。主张有效监管需关注这些结构性与时间性动态,提出生命周期审计、时间可追溯性、反馈问责、递归透明度及反对递归再利用的权利等措施。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
This paper argues that a techno-philosophical reading of the EU AI Act provides insight into the long-term dynamics of data in AI systems, specifically, how the lifecycle from ingestion to deployment generates recursive value chains that challenge existing frameworks for Responsible AI. We introduce a conceptual tool to frame the AI pipeline, spanning data, training regimes, architectures, feature stores, and transfer learning. Using cross-disciplinary methods, we develop a technically grounded and philosophically coherent analysis of regulatory blind spots. Our central claim is that what remains absent from policymaking is an account of the dynamic of becoming that underpins both the technical operation and economic logic of AI. To address this, we advance a formal reading of AI inspired by Simondonian philosophy of technology, reworking his concept of individuation to model the AI lifecycle, including the pre-individual milieu, individuation, and individuated AI. To translate these ideas, we introduce futurity: the self-reinforcing lifecycle of AI, where more data enhances performance, deepens personalisation, and expands application domains. Futurity highlights the recursively generative, non-rivalrous nature of data, underpinned by infrastructures like feature stores that enable feedback, adaptation, and temporal recursion. Our intervention foregrounds escalating power asymmetries, particularly the tech oligarchy whose infrastructures of capture, training, and deployment concentrate value and decision-making. We argue that effective regulation must address these infrastructural and temporal dynamics, and propose measures including lifecycle audits, temporal traceability, feedback accountability, recursion transparency, and a right to contest recursive reuse.
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。