揭示大公司如何用话语构建AI安全，警惕其隐含的权力操控。
What is Safety? Corporate Discourse, Power, and the Politics of Generative AI Safety
- 分析科技公司公开文件中的安全论述，揭示其话语建构策略。
- 安全被包装成实验性、前瞻性的实践，实则服务于企业合法性。
- 适合关注AI治理、技术伦理与人机交互的学者与从业者阅读。
本文通过批判性话语分析，研究头部生成式人工智能企业如何在公开文档中构建和传播“安全”概念。分析表明，这些企业通过话语策略确立自身权威、责任与合法性，将安全定位为一种实验性、前瞻性的实践，并塑造公众参与安全技术的假象。这种话语不仅巩固了企业的正当性，还可能掩盖其真实意图，阻碍其他治理与设计路径的发展。本文贡献在于：一是将安全视为需批判审视的社会技术话语；二是警示人机交互学者避免无批判地接受企业框架，应优先关注问责、公平与正义。通过将安全话语视为权力产物，本研究推动了人工智能领域人机交互研究的批判性议程。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
This work examines how leading generative artificial intelligence companies construct and communicate the concept of "safety" through public-facing documents. Drawing on critical discourse analysis, we analyze a corpus of corporate safety-related statements to explicate how authority, responsibility, and legitimacy are discursively established. These discursive strategies consolidate legitimacy for corporate actors, normalize safety as an experimental and anticipatory practice, and push a perceived participatory agenda toward safe technologies. We argue that uncritical uptake of these discourses risks reproducing corporate priorities and constraining alternative approaches to governance and design. The contribution of this work is twofold: first, to situate safety as a sociotechnical discourse that warrants critical examination; second, to caution human-computer interaction scholars against legitimizing corporate framings, instead foregrounding accountability, equity, and justice. By interrogating safety discourses as artifacts of power, this paper advances a critical agenda for human-computer interaction scholarship on artificial intelligence.
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。