伴随着智能驾驶技术的不断发展完善,“人机共驾”的全新驾驶模式在日常生活中也愈发普遍,而在此种驾驶模式下的交通事故侵权责任认定却愈加复杂,现行法律规定面临新的挑战。本文旨在通过对“人机共驾”模式的底层逻辑进行梳理,分析当前法律框架在该模式下的不足,探索“人机共驾”智能驾驶汽车侵权责任认定更加科学、合理的解决方案,并提出相应的改进建议,推动法律体系的完善,以适应智能驾驶技术的快速发展,促进技术和法律的同步发展。With the continuous development and improvement of intelligent driving technology, the “human-machine co-pilot” driving mode is becoming increasingly common in daily life, but the identification of traffic accident liability in this mode of driving is becoming more complex, and the current legal provisions are facing new challenges. This paper aims to analyze the underlying logic of the “human-machine co-pilot” driving mode, identify the shortcomings of the current legal framework in this mode, explore more scientific and reasonable solutions for the liability determination of intelligent driving vehicles in the “human-machine co-pilot” mode, and put forward corresponding improvement suggestions to promote the perfection of the legal system and adapt to the rapid development of intelligent driving technology, thereby promoting the synchronous development of technology and law.
在人工智能蓬勃发展的时代,文化消费领域历经深刻变革,结构发生显著变化。智能化带来了新消费形式,凭借大数据分析、智能推荐等技术,精准匹配消费者需求,拓展消费渠道,提升消费体验,推动文化消费增长。然而,这一发展过程并非一帆风顺,科技进步与伦理规范间的矛盾逐渐显现,隐私问题格外突出。文化消费属于精神层面的活动,对信息载体的依赖程度远超物质消费,致使隐私保护面临更大挑战。实际消费中,消费者隐私信息易泄露,隐私权益受损,面对侵权时,常因举证难、维权流程繁琐,难以有效维权。深入剖析文化场馆对消费者隐私信息的利用情况,不仅有助于完善文化消费领域隐私保护的理论体系,为后续研究提供新的视角与数据支撑,还能提出针对性的改进措施,在实践中切实解决消费者隐私保护难题,助力文化消费市场的健康、可持续发展。In the era of booming artificial intelligence, the field of cultural consumption has undergone deep transformations and marked structural changes. The new form of consumption brought about by intelligence, by virtue of big data analysis, intelligent recommendation and other technologies, accurately matches consumer demand, expands consumption channels, improves the consumer experience and promotes the growth of cultural consumption. However, this development process has not been easy, and the contradiction between technological progress and ethical norms has gradually appeared, with the privacy issue being particularly prominent. Cultural consumption is a spiritual activity that relies on information vehicles to a much greater degree than material consumption, making privacy protection a bigger challenge. In actual consumption, consumers’ personal information is easily leaked, their privacy rights are damaged, and when they face infringement of rights, they often find it difficult to effectively defend their rights due to the difficult evidence and complicated process of defense. In-depth analysis of the utilization of consumer privacy information by cultural venues not only helps to improve the theoretical system of privacy protection in the field of cultural consumption, provides new perspectives and data support for subsequent research, but also puts forward targeted improvement measures, which can effectively solve the problem of consumer privacy protection in practice and help the healthy and sustainable development of the cultural consumption market.
最近随着我国一系列刑法修正案的出台,增设了许多的新的罪名,诸如危险驾驶罪、高空抛物罪和妨害安全驾驶罪等刑罚较轻的刑种,但是对于刑罚较轻的犯罪人保护却缺乏着罪责自负理念的指导,同时其罪犯身份也带来了种种的限制,此时解决问题的关键就是要做到平衡社会公共的利益和犯罪人的利益。目前学术界主要是提倡建立前科消灭制度,但是前科消灭制度对于当前中国的实际情况并不合适。理应在已有的较为成熟的未成年人犯罪记录封存制度的基础上,对于宣告刑在三年以下有期徒刑的犯罪分子,对其犯罪记录进行实质化的封存,并且规定查询条件仅限于司法机关基于办案的需要,从而使犯罪人能够实现真正的再社会化。Recently, with the introduction of a series of amendments to China’s criminal law, many new crimes have been added, such as dangerous driving, high-altitude throwing and obstructing safe driving. However, for the protection of light criminals, there is a lack of guidance on the concept of self-bearing, and at the same time, their criminal status also brings all kinds of restrictions, the key to solving the problem at this time is to balance the interests of the public and the interests of the offenders. At present, the academic community mainly advocates the establishment of a criminal record elimination system, which is not suitable for the current actual situation in China. On the basis of the existing relatively mature juvenile criminal record sealing system, for criminals who have been sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, their criminal records shall be substantively sealed, and the inquiry conditions should be limited to the needs of the judicial organs based on the case handling, so that the criminals can achieve the real Re-socialization.
暂无评论