跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.05574 · v1

What Do We Mean When We Say 'F*ck AI'?: Moral Panic, Semantic Indeterminacy, and the Reification of Techno-Capitalism

首次提交 2026-11-04 04:06
版本更新 2026-11-04 04:06
雷达观测 2026-11-05 10:08
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Academic and (increasingly) public resistance to artificial intelligence (AI) often blurs the line between legitimate critique of techno-capitalist exploitation and (inflated) existential risk. Moreover, discourse around AI can sometimes resemble a "moral panic" where an apparently clear and identifiable scapegoat is targeted in lieu of the complex systemic problems that are causing (genuine and justified) social anxieties. However, AI is not a monolith. In this paper, we explore the environmental, political, and socio-technical consequences of the semantic indeterminacy of discourse about "AI" in conjunction with the increasing moral panic encompassing these technologies. We argue that since the umbrella term "AI" lacks a coherent, singular referent, the moral panic about AI inadvertently reifies the concept of an autonomous, singular agent with inherent and often autonomous tendencies, which aligns with corporate narratives. Hence, well-intentioned critique, activist pushback, and public protest paradoxically amplifies hype-based discussions of AI, thus validating the "threat" narrative that tech leaders deploy to exaggerate their products' capabilities and market value, further consolidating and centralising their political and socio-economic power. Moreover, if "AI" does not refer to a unified class of technologies, then policy intended to govern "AI" will systematically (and necessarily) fail. We conclude by proposing ways forward to improve AI literacy, enforce accountability, and repurpose existing regulation in order to imagine a more positive AI future.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-04 04:06 · 最新观测版本

What Do We Mean When We Say 'F*ck AI'?: Moral Panic, Semantic Indeterminacy, and the Reification of Techno-Capitalism

Academic and (increasingly) public resistance to artificial intelligence (AI) often blurs the line between legitimate critique of techno-capitalist exploitation and (inflated) existential risk. Moreover, discourse around AI can sometimes resemble a "moral panic" where an apparently clear and identifiable scapegoat is targeted in lieu of the complex systemic problems that are causing (genuine and justified) social anxieties. However, AI is not a monolith. In this paper, we explore the environmental, political, and socio-technical consequences of the semantic indeterminacy of discourse about "AI" in conjunction with the increasing moral panic encompassing these technologies. We argue that since the umbrella term "AI" lacks a coherent, singular referent, the moral panic about AI inadvertently reifies the concept of an autonomous, singular agent with inherent and often autonomous tendencies, which aligns with corporate narratives. Hence, well-intentioned critique, activist pushback, and public protest paradoxically amplifies hype-based discussions of AI, thus validating the "threat" narrative that tech leaders deploy to exaggerate their products' capabilities and market value, further consolidating and centralising their political and socio-economic power. Moreover, if "AI" does not refer to a unified class of technologies, then policy intended to govern "AI" will systematically (and necessarily) fail. We conclude by proposing ways forward to improve AI literacy, enforce accountability, and repurpose existing regulation in order to imagine a more positive AI future.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗