Дорога к цифровой несвободе: как искусственный интеллект меняет репрессия
Журнал «KANT: Social Sciences & Humanities Series» №1(5) 2021 [стр. 39]
DOI: 10.24923/2305-8757.2021-5.4
Ключевые слова: свобода; демократия; автократия; искуссвенный интеллект; ИИ; цифровая несвобода.
Проблема свобод и несвобод в рамках демократического режима интересует большинство исследователей, поскольку от них зависит, насколько "верно" каждый из нас осознает, каким образом и на кого работают эти категории. Разумеется, в этой области нас интересуют самые последние разработки, поэтому редакция приводит исследование профессора Стивен Фельдштейн из Университета штата Бойсе. Сложно быть согласным с профессором Фельдштейном абсолютно во всем, и поэтому отдельные фрагменты статьи отмечены сносками автора перевода. Нельзя отнять у автора статьи заслуги в том, что изучение этого вопроса требует серьезности и пристального взгляда в будущее. Прежде всего, Стивен Фельдштейн в своей статье разоблачает плоды развитого искусственного интеллекта в качестве пособника и рассадника автократического репрессивного режима правления. Приводит сценарии, по которым современные авторитаристы решают проблемы зарождения оппозиционных сил внутри страны. Рисует прогностические картины, могущие сбыться, если темпы развития технологий в области искусственного интеллекта продолжат темпоральный рост. Тем не менее, надо полагать, что основная посылка, которую хотел передать нам автор, заключается в предостережении от сверхвозможностей искусственного интеллекта, которыми обладает Китай, и плоды новых технологий, которыми он готов поделиться во имя, если продолжить мысль автора статьи, неглубоко скрытого намерения мирового господства, тем самым, как мы можем сделать самостоятельные выводы, нарушая аналогичные планы США.
Feldstein S. The Road to Digital Unfreedom: How Artificial Intelligence is Reshaping Repression // Journal of Democracy, January 2019, Volume 30, Number 1, pp. 40-52. DOI: 10.1353/jod.2019.0003
Перевод статьи и сопровождение аннотацией кандидата полит. н. М.А. Григорьевой.
Feldstein S. The Road to Digital Unfreedom: How Artificial Intelligence is Reshaping Repression // Journal of Democracy, January 2019, Volume 30, Number 1, pp. 40-52. DOI: 10.1353/jod.2019.0003
Перевод статьи и сопровождение аннотацией кандидата полит. н. М.А. Григорьевой.
Литература:
1. Li Tao, “Malaysian Police Wear Chinese Start-Up’s AI Camera to Identify Suspected Criminals,” South China Morning Post, 20 April 2018.
2. Aradhana Aravindan and John Geddie, “Singapore to Test Facial Recognition on Lampposts, Stoking Privacy Fears,” Reuters, 13 April 2018.
3. Amy Hawkins, “Beijing’s Big Brother Tech Needs African Faces,” Foreign Policy, 24 July 2018.
4. Nils J. Nilsson, The Quest for Artificial Intelligence: A History of Ideas and Achievements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).
5. Jerry Kaplan, Artificial Intelligence: What Everyone Needs to Know (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 5–6.
6. Executive Office of the President, National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Technology,“Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence,” October 2016, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf, 8.
7. Milan W. Svolik, The Politics of Authoritarian Rule (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 124.
8. Lucan A. Way and Steven Levitsky, “The Dynamics of Autocratic Coercion After the Cold War,” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 39 (September 2006): 387–410.
9. Для сравнения, например, Служба безопасности Восточной Германии полагалась на сеть информаторов, эквивалентную 1% всего населения страны, что приводило к значительным и постоянным экономическим издержкам. См.: Andreas Lichter, Max Löffler, and Sebastian Siegloch, “The Long-Term Costs of Government Surveillance: Insights from Stasi Spying in East Germany,” SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research No. 865, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Berlin, 2016, www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/146890/1/869045423.pdf.
10. V-Dem Institute, Democracy for All? V-Dem Annual Democracy Report 2018, 2018, www.v-dem.net/en/news/democracy-all-v-dem-annual-democracy-report-2018, 19. См. также: Erica Frantz and Andrea Kendall-Taylor, “The Evolution of Autocracy: Why Authoritarianism Is Becoming More Formidable,” Survival 59 (October–November 2017): 57–68.
11. Статистическая и классификационная система, используемая для этих определений, основана на данных за период с 1946 по 2010 год: Barbara Geddes, Joseph Wright, and Erica Frantz, “Autocratic Breakdown and Regime Transitions: A New Data Set,” Perspectives on Politics 12 (June 2014): 313–31. Данные за период 2010-2017 гг. были обновлены автором при содействии Эрики Франц.
12. Collin Anderson, “The Hollowing Middle of the Surveillance Malware Market,” Motherboard, 14 December 2017, https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/595dkd/the-hollowing-middle-of-the-surveillance-malware-market.
13. Josh Horwitz, “WeChat’s New Heat Map Feature Lets Users—and Chinese Authorities - See Where Crowds Are Forming,” Quartz, 7 October 2015, https://qz.com/518908/wechats-new-heat-map-feature-lets-users-and-chinese-authorities-see-where-crowdsare-forming.
14. Gerry Shih, “China’s Mass Indoctrination Camps Evoke Cultural Revolution,” AP, 18 May 2018.
15. Adrian Zenz and James Leibold, “Chen Quanguo: The Strongman Behind Beijing’s Securitization Strategy in Tibet and Xinjiang,” Jamestown Foundation, China Brief, 21 September 2017.
16. Human Rights Watch, “China: Big Data Fuels Crackdown in Minority Region,” 26 February 2018, www.hrw.org/news/2018/02/26/china-big-data-fuels-crackdown-minority-region.
17. Cate Cadell, “From Laboratory in Far West, China’s Surveillance State Spreads Quietly,” Reuters, 14 August 2018; Human Rights Watch, “China: Minority Region Collects DNA from Millions,” 13 December 2017, www.hrw.org/news/2017/12/13/chinaminority-region-collects-dna-millions.
18. Josh Chin and Clément Bürge, “Twelve Days in Xinjiang: How China’s Surveillance State Overwhelms Daily Life,” Wall Street Journal, 19 December 2017.
19. Will Knight, “The US Military Is Funding an Effort to Catch Deepfakes and Other AI Trickery,” MIT Technology Review, 23 May 2018.
20. See LeRoy Ashby and Rod Gramer, Fighting the Odds: The Life of Senator Frank Church (Pullman, Wash.: Washington State University Press, 1994), 478.
21. Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans: Final Report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, United States Senate, Book II (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976), www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/94755_II.pdf, III.
22. Wendy Lee, “How Tech’s Lack of Diversity Leads to Racist Software,” SFGATE, 22 July 2015.
23. Princeton University, Engineering School, “Biased Bots: Human Prejudices Sneak into Artificial Intelligence Systems,” ScienceDaily, 13 April 2017.
24. Minxin Pei, “China in Xi’s ‘New Era’: A Play for Global Leadership,” Journal of Democracy 29 (April 2018): 38.
25. Kai-Fu Lee, AI Superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2018), 56.
26. Lorand Laskai, “Why Does Everyone Hate Made in China 2025?” Council on Foreign Relations, Net Politics, 28 March 2018, www.cfr.org/blog/why-does-everyonehate-made-china-2025.
27. Paul Triolo, Elsa Kania, and Graham Webster, “Translation: Chinese Government Outlines AI Ambitions Through 2020,” New America, DigiChina, 26 January 2018, www.newamerica.org/cybersecurity-initiative/digichina/blog/translation-chinese-governmentoutlines-ai-ambitions-through-2020.
1. Li Tao, “Malaysian Police Wear Chinese Start-Up’s AI Camera to Identify Suspected Criminals,” South China Morning Post, 20 April 2018.
2. Aradhana Aravindan and John Geddie, “Singapore to Test Facial Recognition on Lampposts, Stoking Privacy Fears,” Reuters, 13 April 2018.
3. Amy Hawkins, “Beijing’s Big Brother Tech Needs African Faces,” Foreign Policy, 24 July 2018.
4. Nils J. Nilsson, The Quest for Artificial Intelligence: A History of Ideas and Achievements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).
5. Jerry Kaplan, Artificial Intelligence: What Everyone Needs to Know (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 5–6.
6. Executive Office of the President, National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Technology,“Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence,” October 2016, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf, 8.
7. Milan W. Svolik, The Politics of Authoritarian Rule (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 124.
8. Lucan A. Way and Steven Levitsky, “The Dynamics of Autocratic Coercion After the Cold War,” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 39 (September 2006): 387–410.
9. Для сравнения, например, Служба безопасности Восточной Германии полагалась на сеть информаторов, эквивалентную 1% всего населения страны, что приводило к значительным и постоянным экономическим издержкам. См.: Andreas Lichter, Max Löffler, and Sebastian Siegloch, “The Long-Term Costs of Government Surveillance: Insights from Stasi Spying in East Germany,” SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research No. 865, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Berlin, 2016, www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/146890/1/869045423.pdf.
10. V-Dem Institute, Democracy for All? V-Dem Annual Democracy Report 2018, 2018, www.v-dem.net/en/news/democracy-all-v-dem-annual-democracy-report-2018, 19. См. также: Erica Frantz and Andrea Kendall-Taylor, “The Evolution of Autocracy: Why Authoritarianism Is Becoming More Formidable,” Survival 59 (October–November 2017): 57–68.
11. Статистическая и классификационная система, используемая для этих определений, основана на данных за период с 1946 по 2010 год: Barbara Geddes, Joseph Wright, and Erica Frantz, “Autocratic Breakdown and Regime Transitions: A New Data Set,” Perspectives on Politics 12 (June 2014): 313–31. Данные за период 2010-2017 гг. были обновлены автором при содействии Эрики Франц.
12. Collin Anderson, “The Hollowing Middle of the Surveillance Malware Market,” Motherboard, 14 December 2017, https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/595dkd/the-hollowing-middle-of-the-surveillance-malware-market.
13. Josh Horwitz, “WeChat’s New Heat Map Feature Lets Users—and Chinese Authorities - See Where Crowds Are Forming,” Quartz, 7 October 2015, https://qz.com/518908/wechats-new-heat-map-feature-lets-users-and-chinese-authorities-see-where-crowdsare-forming.
14. Gerry Shih, “China’s Mass Indoctrination Camps Evoke Cultural Revolution,” AP, 18 May 2018.
15. Adrian Zenz and James Leibold, “Chen Quanguo: The Strongman Behind Beijing’s Securitization Strategy in Tibet and Xinjiang,” Jamestown Foundation, China Brief, 21 September 2017.
16. Human Rights Watch, “China: Big Data Fuels Crackdown in Minority Region,” 26 February 2018, www.hrw.org/news/2018/02/26/china-big-data-fuels-crackdown-minority-region.
17. Cate Cadell, “From Laboratory in Far West, China’s Surveillance State Spreads Quietly,” Reuters, 14 August 2018; Human Rights Watch, “China: Minority Region Collects DNA from Millions,” 13 December 2017, www.hrw.org/news/2017/12/13/chinaminority-region-collects-dna-millions.
18. Josh Chin and Clément Bürge, “Twelve Days in Xinjiang: How China’s Surveillance State Overwhelms Daily Life,” Wall Street Journal, 19 December 2017.
19. Will Knight, “The US Military Is Funding an Effort to Catch Deepfakes and Other AI Trickery,” MIT Technology Review, 23 May 2018.
20. See LeRoy Ashby and Rod Gramer, Fighting the Odds: The Life of Senator Frank Church (Pullman, Wash.: Washington State University Press, 1994), 478.
21. Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans: Final Report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, United States Senate, Book II (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976), www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/94755_II.pdf, III.
22. Wendy Lee, “How Tech’s Lack of Diversity Leads to Racist Software,” SFGATE, 22 July 2015.
23. Princeton University, Engineering School, “Biased Bots: Human Prejudices Sneak into Artificial Intelligence Systems,” ScienceDaily, 13 April 2017.
24. Minxin Pei, “China in Xi’s ‘New Era’: A Play for Global Leadership,” Journal of Democracy 29 (April 2018): 38.
25. Kai-Fu Lee, AI Superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2018), 56.
26. Lorand Laskai, “Why Does Everyone Hate Made in China 2025?” Council on Foreign Relations, Net Politics, 28 March 2018, www.cfr.org/blog/why-does-everyonehate-made-china-2025.
27. Paul Triolo, Elsa Kania, and Graham Webster, “Translation: Chinese Government Outlines AI Ambitions Through 2020,” New America, DigiChina, 26 January 2018, www.newamerica.org/cybersecurity-initiative/digichina/blog/translation-chinese-governmentoutlines-ai-ambitions-through-2020.
The road to digital unfreedom: how artificial intelligence is reshaping repression
Keywords: freedom; democracy; autocracy; artificial intelligence; AI; digital unfreedom.
The problem of freedoms and non-freedoms within the framework of a democratic regime is of interest to most researchers, since it depends on them how "correctly" each of us understands how and for whom these categories work. Of course, we are interested in the latest developments in this area, so the editors cite a study by Professor Stephen Feldstein from Boise State University. It is difficult to agree with Professor Feldstein absolutely in everything, and therefore some fragments of the article are marked with footnotes of the author of the translation. The author of the article cannot be taken away from the merit that the study of this issue requires seriousness and a close look into the future. First of all, Stephen Feldstein in his article exposes the fruits of advanced artificial intelligence as an accomplice and hotbed of an autocratic repressive regime of government. Cites the scenarios according to which modern authoritarians solve the problems of the emergence of opposition forces within the country. Draws predictive pictures that can come true if the pace of development of technologies in the field of artificial intelligence continues to grow temporally. Nevertheless, we must assume that the main premise that the author wanted to convey to us is a warning against the superpowers of artificial intelligence that China possesses and the fruits of new technologies that it is ready to share in the name, if we continue the author's thought, of a shallow hidden intention of world domination, thereby, as we can draw independent conclusions, violating similar plans of the United States.