The Age of Digital Intelligence Makes Critical Thinking Even More Necessary

At present, the widespread application of digital-intelligence technologies such as generative artificial intelligence is profoundly reshaping the ways in which humans obtain information and make judgments, and it is also making critical thinking increasingly a core competency necessary for digital citizens. General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized: “We must place greater emphasis on the independent cultivation of talent, and place greater emphasis on the cultivation and nurturing of scientific spirit, innovation ability, and critical thinking.” [1]1 Xi Jinping, speech at a symposium on the cultivation of talent, date unspecified in the original text. The “Outline of the 15th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development of the People’s Republic of China,” in the section “Coordinatedly Promoting the Cultivation of Innovative Talents,” explicitly puts forward the requirement to “strengthen the cultivation of scientific literacy, critical thinking, and innovation ability among young people.” [2]2 The 15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030) is the next national medium-term development plan of the People’s Republic of China, following the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021–2025). Situated in the age of digital intelligence, it is all the more necessary to deeply cultivate critical thinking, so as to better distinguish truth from falsehood and make rational choices amid the flood of information.

当前，生成式人工智能等数智技术的广泛应用，正深刻重塑着人类获取信息与作出判断的方式，也使批判性思维愈发成为数字公民必备的核心能力。习近平总书记强调：“要更加重视人才自主培养，更加重视科学精神、创新能力、批判性思维的培养培育。”《中华人民共和国国民经济和社会发展第十五个五年规划纲要》在“协同推进创新型人才培养”部分，明确提出了“加强青少年科学素养、批判性思维和创新能力培养”的要求。身处数智时代，更需要厚植批判性思维，方能更好在信息洪流中明辨真伪、理性抉择。

The Value of Critical Thinking Is Increasingly Prominent

批判性思维的价值日益凸显

People today are situated in a flood of information. Every day when they open their phones, they are confronted with an endless stream of push notifications, countless short videos, and numerous trending topics. On the surface, people have never been able to obtain information as conveniently as they do today; but upon closer examination, one finds that the convenience of information acquisition has not naturally brought about an improvement in judgment. In the face of massive amounts of content, many people find it difficult to distinguish truth from falsehood, increasingly tend to believe information that “looks real,” and increasingly become accustomed to treating “feelings” as “reasons.” Behind this predicament lies a profound technological root: algorithmic mechanisms continuously push to users content they “like to see” but not necessarily “need to see”; generative artificial intelligence has greatly lowered the production cost of false information—a synthesized image or a fabricated news story is often difficult for ordinary people to detect; the traffic logic of platforms favors emotionally charged and polarized content, while suppressing cautious, meticulous, and measured analysis.

今天的人们身处信息洪流之中。每天打开手机，扑面而来的是刷不完的推送、看不尽的短视频和数不清的热搜。表面上看，人们从未像今天这样便捷地获取信息；但细究便会发现，信息获取的便利并未自然带来判断力的提升。许多人在海量内容面前难以辨别真假，愈发倾向于相信“看起来像真的”信息，也愈发习惯将“感受”当作“理由”。这一困境的背后，有着深刻的技术根源：算法机制持续向用户推送他们“喜欢看”而不一定“需要看”的内容；生成式人工智能大幅降低了虚假信息的生产成本，一张合成图片、一段伪造新闻，往往很难被普通人识破；平台的流量逻辑偏爱情绪激烈、立场极化的内容，却压制着审慎、细致、留有余地的分析。

It is precisely against this historical backdrop that the value of critical thinking has been historically highlighted, becoming a core competency that the public urgently needs to cultivate and enhance in digital life. In 2021, the Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission issued the “Action Plan for Enhancing National Digital Literacy and Skills,” which explicitly states: “Enhancing national digital literacy and skills is a strategic task to meet the requirements of the digital age, to improve the quality of the people, and to promote the comprehensive development of individuals; it is the necessary path to transition from a large internet country to a strong internet country; and it is also a key measure to bridge the digital divide and promote common prosperity.” [3]3 The Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission is the leading Party-state body overseeing internet policy and cybersecurity in China. Critical thinking is precisely an important cornerstone of this literacy framework—it concerns whether individuals can make independent and responsible judgments amid the flood of information. Innovation lacking critical thinking often easily falls into blindness. Building a strong internet country and a digital China, and enabling the internet to better benefit the people, are inseparable from the independent analysis and rational judgment of every participant in the network.

正是在这一时代背景下，批判性思维的价值被历史性地凸显出来，成为公众在数字生活中亟须培养和提升的一种核心素养。2021年，中央网络安全和信息化委员会印发《提升全民数字素养与技能行动纲要》，明确提出“提升全民数字素养与技能，是顺应数字时代要求，提升国民素质、促进人的全面发展的战略任务，是实现从网络大国迈向网络强国的必由之路，也是弥合数字鸿沟、促进共同富裕的关键举措”。批判性思维正是这一素养框架的重要基石——它关乎个体能否在信息洪流中作出独立且负责任的判断，缺乏批判性思维的创新往往容易陷入盲目。建设网络强国、数字中国，让互联网更好造福人民，离不开每一位网络参与者的独立辨析与理性判断。

The core of critical thinking lies in making judgments based on facts, neither blindly following nor rashly rejecting; it can both adhere to a position and be willing to revise viewpoints. Critical thinking encompasses two layers: cognitive skills and intellectual virtues. Cognitively, it includes analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-correction; in terms of virtues, it requires intellectual humility, fairness, and openness. In the words of Confucianism, it is “learn extensively, inquire carefully, think prudently, discern clearly, and practice earnestly.” [4]4 A classical Confucian formulation from the *Doctrine of the Mean* (*Zhongyong*), describing the sequential steps of learning and self-cultivation. “Inquire carefully” corresponds to “continuously questioning propositions and clarifying doubts,” and “practice earnestly” corresponds to “putting examined judgments into action.” It is not linear thinking; each step must question and filter the results of the previous step, rather than simply taking another step forward along the same path.

批判性思维的核心在于依据事实作出判断，既不盲从，也不轻率否定；既能坚守立场，又愿修正观点。批判性思维包含认知技能与理智德性两层：认知上涵盖分析、评估、推论、说明与自我校准，德性上要求理智谦逊、公正与开放。用儒家的话说，就是“博学之，审问之，慎思之，明辨之，笃行之”，“审问之”对应“对命题持续追问、澄清疑点”，“笃行之”对应“将经审查的判断付诸行动”。它不是线性思维，其每一步都要对前一步的成果进行质疑与筛选，而非顺势而为地“再进一步”。

As a cognitive potential of humans, critical thinking needs to be stimulated through conscious practice. It is not only a cognitive skill but also an intellectual virtue—that is, being honest with the truth, respecting evidence, and being fair to arguments. If this foundational quality is missing, even the most exquisite reasoning may degenerate into a tool for finding justifications for pre-existing conclusions. The free and comprehensive development of humans necessarily includes spiritual autonomy and intellectual independence. A person who cannot judge independently and whose beliefs are easily manipulated by external forces cannot be said to enjoy genuine free development. Critical thinking is precisely the foundational component for realizing the free and comprehensive development of humans at the epistemological level.

作为人的一种认知潜能，批判性思维需要通过自觉练习来激发。它不仅是一种认知技能，更是一种理智德性，即对真相保持诚实、对证据心怀尊重、对论证秉持公正。若缺失这份底色，再精湛的推理也可能沦为为既有结论寻找借口的工具。人的自由全面发展必然包含精神自主与思想独立，一个无法独立判断、容易被外部力量操控信念的人，谈不上真正意义上的自由发展。而批判性思维，正是在认识论层面实现人的自由全面发展的基础性构件。

Real Challenges to Critical Thinking from the Digital-Intelligence Ecosystem

数智生态对批判性思维的现实挑战

The information ecosystem of the digital-intelligence age is bringing unprecedented tests to the cultivation of critical thinking. Algorithmic recommendations may narrow people’s cognitive horizons; generative artificial intelligence increases the difficulty of distinguishing truth from falsehood in information; emotionally charged content, under the logic of traffic, easily encroaches on the space for rational discussion. Facing these phenomena squarely helps to cultivate critical thinking in a more targeted manner.

数智时代的信息生态，正在给批判性思维的养成带来前所未有的考验。算法推荐可能窄化人们的认知视野，生成式人工智能加大了信息真伪的辨识难度，情绪化内容在流量逻辑下容易影响理性讨论的空间。正视这些现象，有助于更有针对性地培育批判性思维。

First, the information cocoon effect. The recommendation systems of modern internet platforms meticulously analyze users’ click frequency, page dwell time, likes, comments, and other interactive behaviors, and on this basis continuously push content that aligns with user preferences. This precise matching mechanism is indeed effective in enhancing user experience and platform operational efficiency, but it may also gradually narrow the scope of information users receive, exposing them relatively less to viewpoints different from their own, and easily confining them within a similar information environment constructed by algorithms. People situated within it often do not easily notice—the information they encounter daily tends to support their original views, and over time they may mistakenly believe this to be the consensus of the majority in society, thereby reducing their tolerance for different voices. This reminds us that enhancing cognitive ability requires actively expanding information sources and maintaining an open mindset.

其一，信息茧房效应。现代互联网平台的推荐系统，会细致分析用户的点击频率、页面停留时长、点赞评论等互动行为，以此为依据持续推送与用户偏好相符的内容。这种精准匹配机制在提升用户使用体验和平台运营效率方面确有成效，但也可能使用户的信息接收范围逐渐收窄，相对较少接触到与自己立场不同的观点，容易局限在算法构筑的相似信息环境中。而身处其中的人往往并不容易察觉——他们日常接触的信息多倾向于支持自己的原有看法，久而久之便可能会误以为这就是社会多数人的共识，进而降低对不同声音的包容度。这提醒我们，提升认知能力必须主动拓展信息源、保持开放心态。

Second, the increased difficulty of identifying false information. In the past, producing convincingly false information required specialized skills and high financial costs; today, the proliferation of generative artificial intelligence has greatly lowered this threshold. Ordinary people, with simple operations, can use AI tools to generate text with professional wording and realistic details, synthesize images that are difficult for the naked eye to distinguish, and even produce deepfake videos with perfectly synchronized audio and video, making it often impossible for human senses alone to directly discern truth from falsehood. Research shows that on social media, novel false information spreads faster and more widely than true information, which is related to its greater ability to provoke emotional reactions. This reminds us that while enjoying technological convenience, we also need to place greater emphasis on cultivating habits of information verification, source tracing, and cross-referencing.

其二，虚假信息的识别难度加大。过去，制造以假乱真的虚假信息需要专业技术与较高的资金成本；如今，生成式人工智能的普及大幅降低了这一门槛。普通人只需简单操作，即可借助人工智能工具生成措辞专业、细节逼真的文本，合成肉眼难以辨别的图片，甚至制作出音画完全同步的深度伪造视频，仅凭人的感官往往难以直接分辨真伪。研究显示，在社交媒体上，新奇类虚假信息的传播速度与范围往往超过真实信息，这与其更容易激发情绪反应有关。这提醒我们，在享受技术便利的同时，也需要更加重视信息查证、来源追溯和交叉比对的习惯养成。

Third, the emotional tendency in the information ecosystem. The functions and mechanisms of likes, reposts, comments, etc., on digital platforms, in actual operation, tend to amplify emotionally charged and sharply positioned content, because such content can trigger user reactions in a short time, thereby increasing platform activity. In contrast, expressions that are prudent in thought, balanced in viewpoint, rigorous in argument, and emphasize logical reasoning often lack immediate emotional impact and thus find it harder to gain widespread attention and interaction, remaining in a relatively marginal position. If users are immersed for a long time in such an emotion-driven information ecosystem, they may unconsciously tend to equate emotional resonance with rational correctness, and treat the general approval of the group as objective fact itself. Over time, the basis on which people judge the truth of information and the reasonableness of viewpoints may gradually shift from the evidence support and logical rigor that should be relied upon, to whether the content can arouse widespread attention. This, to a certain extent, can weaken the rational foundation and critical thinking ability that public discussion should possess. Of course, this does not mean that emotional expression itself is problematic; rather, it reminds us that we need to consciously leave space for rational examination beyond emotional reactions.

其三，信息生态中的情绪化倾向。数字平台中的点赞、转发、评论等功能和机制，在实际运作中容易放大情绪鲜明、立场突出的内容，因为这类内容能够在短时间内引发用户反应，从而提升平台活跃度。相比之下，那些审慎思考、观点平衡、论证严密且强调逻辑推理的表达，常因缺乏即时的情绪冲击力而较难获得广泛关注与互动，处于相对边缘的位置。如果长期沉浸于这种以情绪驱动为主导的信息生态中，用户可能会不自觉地倾向于将情感共鸣等同于理性正确，把群体的普遍认同视为客观事实本身。久而久之，人们判断信息真伪与观点合理性的依据，便可能从原本应倚重的证据支撑与逻辑严谨性，逐渐转向内容能否激起广泛关注，这在一定程度上会削弱公共讨论所应有的理性基础与批判性思维能力。当然，这并不意味着情绪表达本身有问题，而是提示我们需要有意识地在情绪反应之外，留出理性审视的空间。

Fourth, there are hidden cognitive risks behind the use of intelligent tools. Although tools such as AI assistants and intelligent search greatly enhance the efficiency and convenience of daily life, helping people quickly obtain information and organize content, they conceal cognitive risks. If people become overly dependent on them, they easily form the habit of directly adopting information without discrimination, gradually allowing algorithms to replace their own thinking, treating “AI says so” or “system recommendation” as the final conclusion, thereby potentially weakening the capacity for independent judgment and critical scrutiny. It should be noted that the root cause of such problems lies not in the tools themselves, but in the deviation in the way people use them. Artificial intelligence should be an assistant to human cognition and decision-making, helping us think more efficiently, rather than replacing our thinking. Only by maintaining a clear sense of agency and rationally setting the boundaries of tool use can we fully leverage the positive role of intelligent technology while preserving the autonomy and creativity of human thought.

其四，智能工具使用背后潜藏认知隐患。人工智能助手、智能搜索等工具虽然极大提升了生活效率与便利性，能帮人快速获取信息、梳理内容，但其背后潜藏认知隐患。如果过度依赖，人们容易形成不加辨别便直接采纳信息的习惯，逐渐让算法替代自身的思考，将“AI这么说”“系统推荐”视为最终结论，从而可能弱化独立判断与批判性审查的能力。需要说明的是，造成这类问题的根源并不在工具本身，而在于人们对工具的使用方式出现偏差。人工智能应当是辅助人类认知与决策的帮手，帮助我们更高效地思考，而不是代替我们思考。保持清晰的主体意识，合理设定工具的使用边界，才能既充分发挥智能技术的积极作用，又能维护人类思维的自主性与创造力。

Pathways for Cultivating Critical Thinking

批判性思维的培育路径

The phenomena brought about by the digital-intelligence ecosystem are not insurmountable obstacles; rather, they remind us to place greater emphasis on the systematic cultivation of critical thinking. Through the coordinated advancement of regulatory improvement, school education, platform responsibility, social atmosphere, and individual habits, we can fully enjoy the convenience of technology while continuously enhancing our own judgment and independent thinking abilities, promoting the digital literacy and skills of the entire population to a higher level, and providing strong support for building a cyber power, a digital China, and a smart society.

数智生态带来的上述现象，并非不可克服的障碍，而是提醒我们要更加重视批判性思维的系统培育。通过法规完善、学校教育、平台责任、社会氛围与个人习惯的协同推进，我们完全可以在享受技术便利的同时，持续提升自身判断力与独立思考能力，推动全民数字素养与技能达到更高水平，为网络强国、数字中国、智慧社会建设提供有力支撑。

Improve AI regulation. AI regulation refers to the use of laws, ethics, standards, technical requirements, and platform governance to regulate the design, deployment, and use of AI systems, in order to prevent their potential adverse effects on individual rights and social order. In recent years, major economies around the world have successively introduced relevant regulatory policies, such as the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act, which implements tiered supervision of AI systems according to risk levels. In 2023, the Cyberspace Administration of China and six other departments jointly issued the Interim Measures for the Management of Generative AI Services, explicitly requiring generative AI service providers to bear corresponding responsibility for the authenticity and accuracy of the content they generate; in the same year, China proposed the Global AI Governance Initiative, advocating a people-centered approach and the principle of AI for good. Reasonable regulation can create a healthier information environment for the cultivation of critical thinking. For example, transparency requirements allow users to at least know “why this content was pushed to me,” providing a starting point for critical scrutiny; content labeling obligations remind users to remain cautious about AI-generated content; anti-manipulation protections prevent AI from psychologically manipulating users, echoing the requirement of critical thinking that “judgment should not be swayed by irrational factors”; the platform responsibility system pushes platforms to shift from a single traffic logic to one that also takes social responsibility into account. These four mechanisms support each other and work in multiple ways, providing institutional safeguards for critical thinking.

完善人工智能规制。人工智能规制，是指通过法律、伦理、标准、技术要求和平台治理等手段，对人工智能系统的设计、部署和使用加以规范，以防范其对个人权益与社会秩序可能产生的不利影响。近年来，世界主要经济体纷纷出台相关规制政策，如欧盟通过《人工智能法案》，按风险等级对人工智能系统实施分级监管。2023年，国家互联网信息办公室等七部门联合发布《生成式人工智能服务管理暂行办法》，明确要求生成式人工智能服务提供者对生成内容的真实性与准确性承担相应责任；同年，中国提出全球人工智能治理倡议，倡导坚持以人为本、智能向善。合理的规制能够为批判性思维的培养营造更健康的信息环境。例如，透明度要求让用户至少知晓“为何为我推送这条内容”，为批判性审视提供起点；内容标注义务提醒用户对AI生成内容保持审慎；反操纵保护防止人工智能对用户实施心理操纵，呼应批判性思维所要求的“判断不受非理性因素左右”；平台责任制度推动平台由单一流量逻辑转向兼顾社会责任。四重机制相互支撑、多管齐下，为批判性思维提供制度保障。

Optimize digital education in schools. At the primary and secondary education stages, the cultivation of critical thinking does not require a separate course; it is better integrated into the daily teaching of subjects such as Chinese language and history. For example, in Chinese language teaching, students can be guided to analyze whether the arguments in news reports are sufficient and whether the reasoning is credible; mathematics teaching can be extended to identifying misleading information in data charts, such as deliberately exaggerated numerical differences or ambiguous statistical calibers, helping students learn to seek truth behind the data; information technology courses can include teaching content on algorithmic recommendation mechanisms, helping students understand the logic and principles of information push and actively avoid information narrowing. In particular, the thinking mode of “questioning the reasons, examining the evidence, and verifying the sources” should be integrated throughout teaching, so that students receive training in critical thinking in every class. At the higher education stage, logic and critical thinking should be core content of general education, helping students build a rigorous thinking system and enhance their ability to analyze complex issues and distinguish among diverse viewpoints. Universities can systematically design relevant courses to progressively lay a solid foundation in scientific thinking for students’ academic exploration and future development.

优化学校数字教育。在初、中等教育阶段，批判性思维的培养无需单独设课，更适合融入语文、历史等学科的日常教学之中。例如，在语文教学中可引导学生分析新闻报道中的论据是否充分、论证是否可信；数学教学可延伸至识别数据图表中的误导信息，如被刻意夸大的数值差异或模糊的统计口径，帮助学生学会从数据背后探寻真相；信息技术课程则可纳入算法推荐机制的教学内容，帮助学生理解信息推送的逻辑和原理，主动避免信息窄化。特别是要将“追问缘由、检验证据、核查来源”的思维模式贯穿教学始终，让学生在每堂课中都能接受批判性思维的训练。进入高等教育阶段，逻辑与批判性思维应作为通识教育的核心内容，助力学生构建严谨的思维体系，提升分析复杂议题、辨析多元观点的能力。高校可系统设计相关课程，为学生学术探索与未来发展循序渐进地夯实科学思维基础。

Guide platforms to fulfill social responsibilities. If the platform’s incentive mechanism is long-term biased toward emotional content, users’ critical thinking training can only struggle upstream against the torrent of information, not only consuming a great deal of energy to distinguish truth from falsehood but also potentially falling into cognitive biases. Institutional guidance in the field of AI governance should be used to encourage platforms to optimize their mechanisms with clear rules, guiding them to assume corresponding social responsibilities while pursuing commercial value and safeguarding a healthy information ecosystem. Specifically, this includes incorporating information quality indicators into the design of recommendation algorithms, using technical means to balance emotional appeal and content depth; setting up necessary verification steps before viral content spreads, filtering out meaningless emotional catharsis and false information; providing users with diverse information access channels to help them break out of information cocoons; and so on.

引导平台履行社会责任。如果平台的激励机制长期偏向情绪化内容，用户的批判性思维训练便只能在信息的洪流中艰难逆流而上，不仅要耗费大量精力甄别信息真伪，还可能陷入认知偏差。应借助人工智能治理领域的制度引导，用明确的规则鼓励平台优化机制，引导其在追求商业价值的同时，承担起相应的社会责任，守护好健康的信息生态。具体而言，在设计推荐算法时纳入信息质量指标，用技术手段平衡情绪吸引力与内容深度；在病毒式传播内容扩散前设置必要的核查环节，过滤无意义的情绪宣泄与不实信息；为用户提供多元信息获取渠道，帮助其打破信息茧房；等等。

Cultivate the social and cultural soil. The cultivation of critical thinking requires a specific cultural soil: encouraging bold questioning without blindly deferring to authoritative conclusions; advocating rational reasoning, using logic to deconstruct problems; tolerating diverse viewpoints and embracing the collision of different voices; requiring people to maintain an open attitude toward the possibility that “I might be wrong,” and always preserving cognitive humility and openness. In this process, the media should play an active role, advocating in-depth reporting rather than fragmented information, promoting rational expression rather than mere emotional catharsis, and building a healthy and rational platform for public discussion. In public discourse, evidence and logic should become basic standards, guiding the clash of opinions back onto a rational track. The spiritual resources contained in the excellent traditional Chinese culture, such as “learning extensively, inquiring carefully, pondering thoroughly, distinguishing clearly, and practicing earnestly,”[5]5 This phrase originates from the Confucian classic *The Doctrine of the Mean* (《中庸》), describing a step-by-step process of learning and inquiry. It is often cited in contemporary Chinese discourse as a traditional cultural resource for cultivating rigorous thinking. should be deeply explored, inherited, and promoted, so that they release new vitality under the conditions of the new era and effectively connect with the cultivation of critical thinking.

培育社会文化土壤。批判性思维的养成，需要特定的文化土壤：鼓励大胆质疑，不迷信权威定论；崇尚理性说理，用逻辑拆解问题；包容多元观点，接纳不同声音的碰撞；需要人们对“我可能是错的”保持开放态度，时刻维护认知的谦逊和开放性。在此过程中，媒体应当发挥积极作用，倡导深度报道而非碎片化信息，推动理性表达而非单纯情绪宣泄，为公众搭建健康理性讨论的平台。在公共讨论中，证据和逻辑应成为基本准绳，引导观点交锋回归理性轨道。深入挖掘和传承弘扬中华优秀传统文化中蕴含的“博学、审问、慎思、明辨、笃行”的精神资源，使之在新的时代条件下释放新的生命力，与批判性思维培育有效贯通。

Strengthen the formation of individual habits. Ultimately, critical thinking is not an unattainable, profound ability, but a thinking habit that can be integrated into daily life. Cultivating this ability can start with small things in everyday life. For example, before forwarding any information, first assess whether the source is reliable and whether the evidence is solid; when faced with a headline that carries strong emotion or even incitement, pause briefly to verify the original text and the background of the event, avoiding being led astray by emotion; when encountering a viewpoint that contradicts one’s own established opinion, first try to understand the other side’s evidence and perspective, rather than rushing to reject it; when using AI tools, always regard them as aids to thinking, not as final answers that can be directly copied. These seemingly simple actions are the most genuine daily practice of critical thinking. Persisting over the long term, one can gradually develop rigorous and rational thinking habits.

强化个体习惯养成。归根结底，批判性思维并非遥不可及的高深能力，而是可以融入日常生活的思维习惯。培养这一能力，可以从身边的小事做起。例如，在转发各类信息前，先评估信息来源是否可靠，论据是否扎实；面对带有强烈情绪甚至煽动性的标题时，先稍作停顿，查证原文与事件背景，避免被情绪带偏；遇到与自己固有见解相悖的观点时，先试着理解对方的论据与角度，而不是急于否定；使用人工智能工具时，始终将其视为辅助思考的手段，而非能直接照搬的最终答案。这些看似简单的行为，正是批判性思维最真实的日常践行。长期坚持，便能逐步养成严谨、理性的思维习惯。

(Author: Xiong Minghui, Director and Professor of the Digital Rule of Law Laboratory, Zhejiang University)

（作者：熊明辉，系浙江大学数字法治实验室主任、教授）