所以说您考虑不考虑一下践行自己的要求
我也没有攻击人啊
典
合着在您这边观点是可以胡扯的
还是说您不知道谁主张谁举证。当一个事情跟常识跟现状不符，是需要提出者举证的。你不举证我说你胡扯有啥问题？
难道我说顶天立不是人也得你举证你是人？
1 Like
并非群众
吧u们，标题的含金量还在上升
1 Like
@Creative 你如何看待
Based on the images and text you’ve provided, it seems like there are reports or discussions about potential truck driver strikes in China. Let’s break down the points raised:
Is there a strike reported?
Yes, the images and text strongly suggest there are reports or at least discussions and calls for a truck driver strike. The phrase “卡车司机停止运输” (truck drivers stop transporting) clearly indicates a strike action or call to action. The phrase “造反有理 革命无罪” (rebellion is justified, revolution is not a crime) is a very strong statement often associated with periods of social unrest and protest.
Is it illegal?
The legal text you provided offers a nuanced answer. Here’s a summary based on that text and your interpretation:
- Not explicitly illegal, but not a protected right: Chinese law doesn’t explicitly forbid strikes, but it also doesn’t guarantee the right to strike in the constitution. This creates a legal grey area. The principle “法无禁止即可为” (if it’s not forbidden by law, it’s permissible) could be argued to mean strikes are not inherently illegal.
- Legality depends on circumstances: The legality is heavily dependent on how the strike is conducted and its consequences.
- Potentially legal if:
- It’s a response to illegal employer actions (wage theft, unsafe working conditions, etc.).
- It doesn’t “扰乱社会秩序” (disrupt social order) too severely.
- Potentially illegal/risky if:
- It “扰乱社会秩序” or “扰乱企业生产秩序” (disrupts enterprise production order). This is a very broad and easily applied clause.
- It violates labor contracts (which it likely would if drivers simply stop working).
- It leads to actions that violate the “治安管理处罚法” (Public Security Administration Punishments Law), which could include anything deemed disruptive to public order.
- Potentially legal if:
- Risks for participants:
- Employer retaliation: Companies can refuse to pay wages during the strike and potentially fire striking workers without compensation, arguing breach of contract.
- Police intervention and penalties: If the strike is deemed to “扰乱社会秩序” or “扰乱企业生产秩序,” participants could face warnings, fines, or even detention under the “治安管理处罚法.” Leaders or “首要分子” (principal instigators) face harsher penalties.
- Liability for damages: If the strike causes significant economic losses to companies, they might try to sue striking workers for compensation.
Your points about disruption and “扰乱企业生产秩序”:
You are absolutely right that any strike, especially one involving truck drivers, is inherently disruptive. It’s designed to be. The legal text highlights that “扰乱企业生产秩序” and “扰乱社会秩序” are key points of legal vulnerability for strikers in China. As you and others in the discussion pointed out, it’s very easy for authorities to frame any strike as “扰乱秩序” and therefore legally problematic, regardless of the drivers’ grievances.
The economic and social context:
Your comments and the phrase “我们都在用力的活着” (we are all living with all our might) underscore the likely reasons behind any potential strike. Truck drivers often face:
- Long hours and tough conditions.
- Low pay and potentially wage theft.
- Lack of social security and benefits, especially if classified as “自由职业者” (freelancers).
- Economic pressure from rising costs and potentially falling freight rates.
- Future job insecurity due to automation (autonomous trucks).
The “何不食肉糜” (let them eat cake - a phrase suggesting ignorance of the struggles of the common people) comment is a strong expression of frustration with those who seem to dismiss the drivers’ plight or legalistically focus on “order” without acknowledging the underlying issues.
Autonomous Trucks:
The discussion about autonomous trucks adds another layer of complexity. While currently not widespread, the potential for job displacement due to automation is a real concern for drivers and could be contributing to current anxieties and unrest.
In summary:
- Strikes are a very sensitive issue in China. While not explicitly illegal in all cases, the legal framework makes them highly risky and vulnerable to being deemed unlawful, especially if they cause disruption.
- The focus on “order” often outweighs consideration of workers’ rights and grievances. The “扰乱秩序” clauses in law are broad and can be used to suppress almost any collective action.
- Truck drivers likely have legitimate grievances related to their economic conditions and job security.
- The call for a strike, even if it doesn’t fully materialize or is quickly suppressed, reflects underlying social tensions and worker dissatisfaction.
It’s important to note that this is a complex and sensitive issue, and the situation on the ground can be dynamic and difficult to ascertain definitively from afar.
@Creative 说中文 还有这个帖子后面讨论的不止罢工
乐
别吵了，看看Qwen对岗位替代的预测
DSR1的预测差不多：
以下是根据当前技术发展趋势和经济学逻辑，对六个层次劳动替代率的分析及预测。需要强调的是，替代率受技术成熟度、经济成本、社会接受度和政策法规等多重因素影响，预测存在较大不确定性。分析框架基于技术可行性和成本效益平衡原则：
一、体力劳动
1. 低技能体力劳动（如清洁工、基础搬运工）
- 当前替代率：20%-30%
（扫地机器人、AGV搬运车已普及，但环境适应能力有限） - 50%替代：2040年前后
（随多模态AI+机器人灵巧操作突破） - 90%替代：2070年后
（需解决复杂动态环境感知和超低成本部署）
2. 中技能体力劳动（如卡车司机、生产线质检员）
- 当前替代率：30%-40%
（工业机器人+视觉检测成熟，自动驾驶L4级局部应用） - 50%替代：2035年前后
（自动驾驶货运网络+柔性产线规模化） - 90%替代：2060年前后
（全场景无人化运输+AI质检闭环）
3. 高技能体力劳动（如手术医生、精密仪器维修）
- 当前替代率：5%-10%
（达芬奇手术机器人仅为辅助工具，仍需人类主导） - 50%替代：2050年前后
（触觉反馈+自主决策手术机器人成熟） - 90%替代：22世纪后
（需突破生物组织实时动态建模与伦理障碍）
二、脑力劳动
4. 低技能脑力劳动（如数据录入、基础翻译）
- 当前替代率：70%-80%
（OCR+RPA+神经机器翻译已大规模应用） - 50%替代：已实现（2020年前）
- 90%替代：2030年前后
（多语言大模型+流程自动化完全闭环）
5. 中技能脑力劳动（如会计审计、常规法律文书）
- 当前替代率：40%-50%
（智能财税系统、合同分析AI广泛应用但需人工复核） - 50%替代：2028年前后
（AI审计工具通过行业认证） - 90%替代：2045年前后
（法律AI获得有限司法裁量权）
6. 高技能脑力劳动（如战略咨询、科研创新）
- 当前替代率：10%-15%
（AI辅助文献分析+市场预测，但核心决策依赖人类） - 50%替代：2060年前后
（具备因果推理能力的AGI初步应用） - 90%替代：22世纪后
（强AI突破人类级抽象思维与跨领域创造力）
关键制约因素
- 经济悖论：低技能岗位可能因人力成本极低（如发展中国家制造业）延缓自动化进程
- 长尾问题：90%替代需解决最后10%的边缘案例（如特殊地形清洁、跨文化谈判）
- 社会阻力：医疗、法律等领域的责任认定机制将大幅延迟完全替代
- 技术瓶颈：体力劳动的灵巧操作、脑力劳动的跨领域迁移能力仍是硬骨头
延伸洞察
- U型替代曲线：中技能岗位（如客服、质检）将早于低/高技能岗位被替代
- 人机协作过渡期：2025-2040年将形成"人类决策+AI执行"的混合工作模式
- 创造性溢价：未被替代的10%人类岗位将集中于艺术创作、复杂系统设计等超领域任务
该预测框架强调技术可行性而非必然性，实际进程可能因量子计算突破或全球监管协定等黑天鹅事件加速/延缓20年以上。
牢中再不把财政的钱分给社保/医疗点，无业游民只会越来越多……
看不出两者之间直接关系。财政是创造岗位的，社会保障体系不创造岗位。也看不出对扩大全社会岗位总量有什么用。
少谈理论，多去看看那些失业的人到底为什么离职
我觉得还得是对内发钱对外花掉外汇让人民币升值才对
现在缺的是把死水放出来
但是我国经济毕竟是出口导向的，现在全球经济停滞衰退的大背景下过于激进的转向很有可能演变为世界经济危机。
我就不信一个能给全世界供应产品的全产业链的工业国家会吧自己饿死
那就开战，军队不是用来养鸟的，我就不信有人敢扔核弹
1 Like