[Can AI Achieve Perfect Fairness? When Hayek Meets "Digital Planned Economy"]
In today’s world of rapid technological advancement—with Artificial Intelligence (AI), massive databases, electronic currency, and ubiquitous monitoring—a new voice has emerged: "If the human brain cannot calculate precisely enough, why not let a supercomputer do it?" Proponents argue that modern technology can accurately calculate everyone's needs, achieve optimal wealth distribution, and ensure absolute equality, thereby eliminating resource waste once and for all.
However, if Friedrich Hayek were alive today, he would offer a profound warning against this "Illusion of Technocratic Totalitarianism."
1. The Nature of Knowledge: Big Data Cannot Capture "Local Knowledge"
In his seminal work The Use of Knowledge in Society, Hayek emphasized that the knowledge required for society to function is fragmented, subjective, and constantly changing. While AI is powerful, it processes "historical data."
Hayek’s Rebuttal: Human preferences, creativity, and intuitions about future risks often occur in specific times and places (what he called "the particular circumstances of time and place"). This minute, unquantifiable "local knowledge" cannot be encoded into a massive database. When a government relies on AI for planning, it effectively stifles the flexibility of individuals to adapt to their circumstances, leading to social stagnation.
2. The Evolution of Power: From "Ration Coupons" to "Digital Credit"
Past planned economies relied on physical coupons to control resources; today, this could evolve into precise behavioral steering via electronic currency and surveillance systems.
Hayek’s Rebuttal: If a government controls all consumer data and electronic payment permissions, it possesses "absolute coercive power." This is no longer merely economic management; it is the power of life and death. Once a government can decide who has the right to buy goods or whose "social credit score" is too low to board a train based on an AI's judgment, the universality of law vanishes, replaced by the autocracy of "technocrats."
3. The Chain Effect of Freedom: No Political Independence Without Economic Independence
Proponents believe AI can precisely distribute wealth to achieve equality, but Hayek pointed out that this "equality of result" comes at the cost of "depriving the right to choose."
Hayek’s Rebuttal: Economic freedom is the foundation of all other freedoms. When an AI decides where you "should" live, what you "should" eat, and what job you "should" hold (because the system calculated that it is most efficient for society), you lose everything. Without the opportunity to risk failure or success in a market, humans devolve into a type of "digital serf," dependent on the system's rations to survive.
4. The Fallacy of Efficiency: No Evolution Without Competition
AI-planned economies pursue "Static Efficiency"—how to allocate existing resources.
Hayek’s Rebuttal: True progress comes from the continuous "trial and error" and "discovery" found in market competition. If everything is pre-arranged by a central AI, humanity loses the drive to explore the unknown and create new demands. A perfectly planned economy is, in fact, a society that has stopped progressing.
5. Conclusion: Technology Should Be a "Tool for Liberty," Not a "Blueprint for Enslavement"
Hayek did not oppose technology; he opposed the "Pretense of Knowledge" that occurs when technology is deified. AI should be used to assist individuals in making better decisions, not to replace the individual's right to decide. If we blindly believe that Big Data can bring ultimate equality, we may eventually find ourselves on a fast track to "serfdom," paved by algorithms.
發表文章
