At present, the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) is beyond imagination. Data show that in 2025, the number of artificial intelligence companies in my country will exceed 6,000, and the scale of the core AI industry is expected to exceed 1.2 trillion yuan, a year-on-year increase of nearly 30%; my country will become the largest owner of AI patents in the world, accounting for 60%. However, from a global perspective, coexisting with the prosperity of the industry, there are also new problems and legal disputes that arise from time to time. On the one hand, there is a wave of innovation with thousands of sails competing, and on the other hand, there are all kinds of chaos that break rules and cross boundaries. To revive the pros and cons in the development of artificial intelligence, we must adhere to the principle that "AI empowers people, and people empower AI."

Artificial intelligence is the core engine of a new round of technological revolution and industrial transformation. It is reshaping social production and lifestyle in an unprecedented depth. Take generative AI as an example. It integrates into many scenarios such as communication, office, and creation in the form of an "intelligent assistant", greatly improving efficiency and experience. However, the rapid iteration of technology often leaves ethics and rules behind: How to regulate the abuse of AI face-changing? Who owns the rights to generate the content? Should labeling be mandatory? These questions not only question the bottom line of technological ethics, but also urgently call for a response from the rule of law.

Technology poses the questions, and the rule of law answers the questions. my country has initially built a normative framework to adapt to the development of generative AI: the newly revised Cybersecurity Law not only encourages innovation, but also emphasizes the need to improve artificial intelligence ethical norms, strengthen risk monitoring and assessment, and safety supervision; the "Interim Measures for the Management of Generative Artificial Intelligence Services" clearly requires that the provision and use of generative artificial intelligence services must adhere to the core socialist values; the "Measures for the Labeling of Synthetic Content Generated by Artificial Intelligence" establishes a system for adding labels to synthetic content generated by generative AI. It is not difficult to find that this "inclusive and prudent" regulatory concept neither restricts technological innovation due to choking, nor does it leave regulatory gaps by laissez-faire. Instead, it allows technology to grow in an orderly manner on the fertile soil of the rule of law by clarifying the scope of rights and obligations and delineating the boundaries of prohibition and permission.