夜雨聆风📰消息来源： Medium网站，于2026-06-08 16:00:57收录的《China Won’t Let a Company Replace You with a Robot — America Will》一文
🔗原文链接： https://medium.com/fourth-wave/china-wont-let-a-company-replace-you-with-a-robot-america-will-86797f5dc37c
🤫作品声明：首发于微信公众号，观点不代表平台立场
In late April 2026, the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court told a company it could not fire a man for being automated. The worker, Zhou, did quality assurance. He checked the outputs of the large language models his employer had started leaning on.
2026年4月下旬，杭州中级人民法院裁定，一家公司不得以“岗位被自动化取代”为由解雇一名员工。这位周姓员工原本负责质检，专门审核公司所采用的大模型生成的内容。
The company automated the work he was hired to oversee and offered him a demotion and lower pay. He said no. They fired him.
公司随后实现了该岗位的自动化，并要求他降职减薪。员工拒绝后，公司将其开除。
The court held that replacing a worker with AI is not a major change in objective circumstances under China's Labor Contract Law. It is a choice. A company that picks automation does not get to turn around and void what it owes the person it employed.
法院认为，用AI替代人工并不属于劳动合同法意义上的客观情况发生重大变化，这纯粹是公司的经营选择。企业选择了自动化，并不意味着可以顺便赖掉对员工应尽的义务。
大白话翻译过来，老外作者这意思特简单：这本质上就是公司把赚钱的成本省下来了，但把代价强行转嫁给了员工。咱们国内以前老说“灵活用工”，但这事儿给咱们提了个醒——技术升级可以，但如果想把锅甩给打工人，法律这关你是绕不过去的。
It is remarkable. And it's also ridiculous, because the United States has no such protection. China gives the worker a floor. We give them a pink slip.
这很了不起，但同时也很讽刺，因为在美国根本没有这种保护。中国给了员工一道底线，而我们给的只有一纸解雇通知。
The International Labor Organization found that about 29 percent of female-dominated occupations are exposed to generative AI, against roughly 16 percent of male-dominated ones.
国际劳工组织发现，女性占比高的职业中，约29%正面临生成式AI的冲击，而男性为主的职业中这一比例约为16%。
Decades of sorting did that. It funneled women and workers of color into the clerical and service roles now being fed into a model, while the jobs that need credentials or capital or the authority to decide who gets automated stayed disproportionately white and male.
过去几十年的行业分层造成了这种局面。女性和有色人种被挤到了文职和服务类岗位，而那些需要高门槛资质、资本掌控权，以及“决定谁被自动化”的权力岗位，则大多被白人男性占据。
这里头其实在说，表面上AI是中性的技术，但它其实是在帮那些手握资本的人，把历史积攒下来的偏见给“算法化”了。你在国内搞产品如果没意识到这一点，很容易在推荐算法或者招聘工具里，不经意间就把路给走窄了。
The loom did not end work. The ATM did not end the bank teller. The spreadsheet did not end accountants. Every automation panic produced more jobs than it killed.
织布机没终结纺织工，ATM没让柜员消失，电子表格也没害死会计。每次自动化恐慌过后，创造出的新岗位反而比被淘汰的更多。
This wave is sold the other way around. Not as a way to make the payroll clerk faster. As a way to not have a payroll clerk. Replacement and augmentation do not share the same job math.
但这波AI浪潮的卖点完全变了。它不是为了让财务核算员工作效率更高，而是为了直接裁掉这个岗位。取代和赋能，这账算起来完全不是一个逻辑。
Which is why a human in the loop is not the standard, no matter how often the vendors say it. A human in the loop signs off on the model's output after the fact. It's nothing more than a rubber stamp.
这就是为什么即便厂商天天吹“人在回路”，但这根本不靠谱。所谓的“人在回路”只不过是让人在事后签个字，本质上就是个橡皮图章。
这简直就是国内大厂里最常见的套路嘛！产品经理为了通过合规审核，强行加个“人工审核”环节，结果那个人一天要看几千条数据，最后还不是闭着眼睛点同意？大家心里都门儿清，这哪里是风控，这就是为了甩锅。
The bar was sitting on the floor, and even China stepped over it on this one question, and we tripped. If we're supposed to be the greatest country on earth, we are losing the title to a country we ourselves say treats its workers as disposable.
门槛其实就在地上，连中国在这一问题上都迈过去了，我们却自己绊倒了。如果我们要自称是世界上最伟大的国家，结果却在“如何对待打工人”这件事上输给了被我们视为“把人当消耗品”的国家，这简直是个笑话。
本文由“Medium_ZHcn”Medium中文（ID：Medium_ZHcn）出品，转载请注明出处。
