這封致微軟首席執(zhí)行官薩蒂亞·納德拉和董事長(zhǎng)布拉德·史密斯的信函最初只在內(nèi)部傳閱，但現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)正式公布。相關(guān)的微軟員工抗議公司為軍方提供增強(qiáng)士兵殺傷力的技術(shù)，并認(rèn)為這會(huì)將戰(zhàn)斗轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)?ldquo;模擬游戲“，從而“進(jìn)一步令士兵忘卻戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的殘酷風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和流血現(xiàn)實(shí)”。需要注意的是，微軟即將在西班牙當(dāng)?shù)貢r(shí)間周日舉行的MWC展前發(fā)布會(huì)中亮相新一代的HoloLens混合現(xiàn)實(shí)頭顯。目前微軟尚未對(duì)事件予以置評(píng)。

　　這只是又一次硅谷員工的“We Won’t Build It”運(yùn)動(dòng)。亞馬遜，微軟和谷歌等科技員工曾多次發(fā)起過(guò)抗議活動(dòng)，反對(duì)公司提供存在人道主義問(wèn)題的服務(wù)與產(chǎn)品。例如，谷歌員工在2018年6月曾迫使公司放棄了美國(guó)國(guó)防部的國(guó)防項(xiàng)目，同時(shí)在12月令其擱置為中國(guó)開(kāi)發(fā)特定的搜索引擎產(chǎn)品Project Dragonfly。

　　這不是微軟員工第一次提出對(duì)政府濫用其技術(shù)的擔(dān)憂。在2018年6月，數(shù)百名員工簽署了一份請(qǐng)?jiān)笗?shū)，要求微軟放棄與美國(guó)移民和海關(guān)執(zhí)法局的合同。在2018年10月，一群?jiǎn)T工要求公司取消其為美國(guó)國(guó)防部建設(shè)云服務(wù)的100億美元項(xiàng)目。然而，相關(guān)微軟員工的努力尚未成功迫使微軟放棄前面所述的政府合同。

　　盡管微軟正在鼓勵(lì)對(duì)面部識(shí)別技術(shù)進(jìn)行監(jiān)管和道德辯論，但實(shí)際上他們正在加倍對(duì)向美國(guó)軍方和政府機(jī)構(gòu)的技術(shù)支持。

　　微軟董事長(zhǎng)史密斯在10月的一篇博文中指出：“我們相信美國(guó)需要強(qiáng)大的國(guó)防，而且我們希望保衛(wèi)我們國(guó)家的人員能夠獲得這個(gè)國(guó)家最佳的科技，包括來(lái)自微軟的技術(shù)。”

　　除了要求取消美國(guó)軍方的合同外，今天的公開(kāi)請(qǐng)?jiān)感磐瑫r(shí)呼吁微軟“暫停開(kāi)發(fā)所有的武器技術(shù)”，起草一份相應(yīng)的公開(kāi)聲明，并建立一個(gè)外部審查委員會(huì)負(fù)責(zé)執(zhí)行與監(jiān)督。

　　信函同時(shí)承認(rèn)，微軟已經(jīng)建立了一項(xiàng)名為Aether的人工智能道德審查程序，但他們認(rèn)為這一過(guò)程“對(duì)微軟員工來(lái)說(shuō)不夠透明，顯然不足以阻止武器開(kāi)發(fā)。”

　　微軟員工是否能改變公司在相關(guān)事項(xiàng)的立場(chǎng)仍有待觀察。下面是信函全文：

　　Dear Satya Nadella and Brad Smith,

　　We are a global coalition of Microsoft workers, and we refuse to create technology for warfare and oppression. We are alarmed that Microsoft is working to provide weapons technology to the U.S. Military, helping one country’s government “increase lethality” using tools we built. We did not sign up to develop weapons, and we demand a say in how our work is used.

　　In November, Microsoft was awarded the $479 million Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS) contract with the United States Department of the Army. The contract’s stated objective is to “rapidly develop, test, and manufacture a single platform that Soldiers can use to Fight, Rehearse, and Train that provides increased lethality, mobility, and situational awareness necessary to achieve overmatch against our current and future adversaries.”. Microsoft intends to apply its HoloLens augmented reality technology to this purpose. While the company has previously licensed tech to the U.S. Military, it has never crossed the line into weapons development. With this contract, it does. The application of HoloLens within the IVAS system is designed to help people kill. It will be deployed on the battlefield, and works by turning warfare into a simulated “video game,” further distancing soldiers from the grim stakes of war and the reality of bloodshed.

　　Intent to harm is not an acceptable use of our technology.

　　We demand that Microsoft:

　　1) Cancel the IVAS contract;

　　2) Cease developing any and all weapons technologies, and draft a public-facing acceptable use policy clarifying this commitment;

　　3) Appoint an independent, external ethics review board with the power to enforce and publicly validate compliance with its acceptable use policy.

　　Although a review process exists for ethics in AI, AETHER, it is opaque to Microsoft workers, and clearly not robust enough to prevent weapons development, as the IVAS contract demonstrates. Without such a policy, Microsoft fails to inform its engineers on the intent of the software they are building. Such a policy would also enable workers and the public to hold Microsoft accountable.

　　Brad Smith’s suggestion that employees concerned about working on unethical projects “would be allowed to move to other work within the company” ignores the problem that workers are not properly informed of the use of their work. There are many engineers who contributed to HoloLens before this contract even existed, believing it would be used to help architects and engineers build buildings and cars, to help teach people how to perform surgery or play the piano, to push the boundaries of gaming, and to connect with the Mars Rover (RIP). These engineers have now lost their ability to make decisions about what they work on, instead finding themselves implicated as war profiteers.

　　Microsoft’s guidelines on accessibility and security go above and beyond because we care about our customers. We ask for the same approach to a policy on ethics and acceptable use of our technology. Making our products accessible to all audiences has required us to be proactive and unwavering about inclusion. If we don’t make the same commitment to be ethical, we won’t be. We must design against abuse and the potential to cause violence and harm.

　　Microsoft’s mission is to empower every person and organization on the planet to do more. But implicit in that statement, we believe it is also Microsoft’s mission to empower every person and organization on the planet to do good. We also need to be mindful of who we’re empowering and what we’re empowering them to do. Extending this core mission to encompass warfare and disempower Microsoft employees, is disingenuous, as “every person” also means empowering us. As employees and shareholders we do not want to become war profiteers. To that end, we believe that Microsoft must stop in its activities to empower the U.S. Army’s ability to cause harm and violence.

　　Microsoft Workers