This was Chinese propaganda, perfectly timed around International Workers’ Day on 1 May. It wasn’t a law, though, but a court ruling that spread across media back then, although it has been widely misinterpreted.

The Chinese court ruling doesn’t change that trend [of automation moving from blue-collar to white-collar industries], Moshe Lander, an economics professor at the Canadian Concordia University said at the time:

Indeed, the Chinese ruling doesn’t forbid companies from using AI to automate certain roles held by humans […] Workers, the ruling says, “should also understand the strategic development needs of enterprises, continuously update and improve their professional skills through continuous learning, proactively adapt to the changes in artificial intelligence technology, promote the efficient application of AI technology in production practices, and foster a win-win situation of personal career growth and efficient enterprise development.”

Lander said the ruling, which was issued ahead of China’s Labour Day on May 1, was likely a messaging and “self-preservation” exercise for the ruling Chinese Communist Party given the potential widespread impact of AI-led labour disruptions.

“There’s so many potential people that could be caught up in this that the risk of civil unrest, the risk of regime overthrow, is probably much more paramount to them than concern for the actual worker itself,” he said.

[Edit typo.]

The article is paywalled. It’s not the first time that OP is posting only headline in favor of China without a content.

Many US-based scientists have been moving to other countries over Trump’s crackdown on research funding.

Nature reported:

The move [ Omar Yaghi leaving the US] comes as the administration of President Donald Trump continues its attempts to slash US science spending and limits international research partnerships. Some nations, including China, have responded by trying to lure US talent with the promise of money and support. Earlier this year, for instance, France announced that it would award funds to dozens of US scientists relocating there. China has been wooing international researchers with talent-recruitment programmes, and some of its cities and provinces are even offering researchers lump sums and monthly allowances to relocate within their borders.

The article is paywalled. It’s not the first time that OP is posting only headline in favor of China without a content.

Many US-based scientists have been moving to other countries over Trump’s crackdown on research funding.

Nature reported:

The move [ Omar Yaghi leaving the US] comes as the administration of President Donald Trump continues its attempts to slash US science spending and limits international research partnerships. Some nations, including China, have responded by trying to lure US talent with the promise of money and support. Earlier this year, for instance, France announced that it would award funds to dozens of US scientists relocating there. China has been wooing international researchers with talent-recruitment programmes, and some of its cities and provinces are even offering researchers lump sums and monthly allowances to relocate within their borders.

It was just a valid remark, it’s no so clear. All good I would say.

I admit this is may not be a typical post for this community, but it’s not about Taiwan but also about China.

So should I delete it? Maybe the moderators and other users can’t comment whether or not they expect such news here.

The report estimates that 10% of corporate loans are doubtful, a sharp increase from 2024, while some major banks reported retail non-performing loan ratios as high as 15% in 2025.

The situation appears to be even worse when we consider that loans to the private sector sharply sharply increased in Russia since the full-scale invasion in 2022 and have now reached a new peak.

@alcoholicorn@hexbear.net

This redsails is another absurdly weird propaganda crap. It is completely useless.

That’s indeed bad, but wait until you hear about the sick leave rules in other regions outside Europe and democratic allies, particularly in those that celebrate themselves as ‘socialist’ or ‘communist’.

A quick remainder that this is not only limited to the EU.

Among the larger economies, China has been increasing its business ties to Israel significantly. Bilateral Israel/China trade rebounded since 2023 and in 2025 reached a record high (including Hong Kong).

China benefits more than Israel, as the growth is heavily asymmetric. While Israeli imports from China rose by 25 percent between 2023-2025 to more than USD 16 billion in 2025, Israeli exports to China plummeted by 40 percent to less than USD 3 billion, resulting a huge trade surplus for China.

China is the biggest exporter to Israel with some 25% of Israeli imports coming from China, more than double the US volume. So China makes good money in Israel, too.

In addition, Chinese companies continue to participate in the construction of huge projects critical to the Israeli economy.

A quick remainder that this is not only limited to the EU.

Among the larger economies, China has been increasing its business ties to Israel significantly. Bilateral Israel/China trade rebounded since 2023 and in 2025 reached a record high (including Hong Kong).

China benefits more than Israel, as the growth is heavily asymmetric. While Israeli imports from China rose by 25 percent between 2023-2025 to more than USD 16 billion in 2025, Israeli exports to China plummeted by 40 percent to less than USD 3 billion, resulting a huge trade surplus for China.

China is the biggest exporter to Israel with some 25% of Israeli imports coming from China, more than double the US volume. So China makes good money in Israel, too.

In addition, Chinese companies continue to participate in the construction of huge projects critical to the Israeli economy.

I didn’t mean to call you out. What I wanted to say is that although the system may be imperfect, it is better than in dictatorial regimes celebrated by Novara Media.

This is a textbook example of selection bias by a propaganda medium. They single out 1 measure out of 34, publish “the West bad” tonality, and then hail autocratic systems like the one in China as the solution, although the welfare system and labour rights there are catastrophically worse. This is an essential part of disinformation warfare.

Tim Cook has surrendered Apple to China long time ago. More than 80% of iPhone are still made in China, even though Cook was trying to move production to India in the recent couple of years. It’s essentially a Chinese company dependent on the regime’s decision. If they want Apple to buy in China, they need to buy in China.

Tim Cook has surrendered Apple to China long time ago. More than 80% of iPhone are still made in China, even though Cook was trying to move production to India in the recent couple of years. It’s essentially a Chinese company dependent on the regime’s decision. If they want Apple to buy in China, they need to buy in China.

They need to fire the dumb fuck who made the rule, but I’m not sure what system they use there and how long they’re stuck with him.

‘They’ use a democratic system which means that usually they are stuck with the “dumbfuck” until the next election. Very much unlike in dictatorships where they are stuck with the “dumbfuck” for much longer while any critique similar to what we read here would be harshly punished as ‘they’ have no say.

There is a community here on Lemmy that tries to normalize biased media that favour China and other autocratic systems.

I don’t support this German move, but in addition to the end to phone-based sick notes, the German government introduced another 33 measures, including a €10 billion in income tax relief targeted at lower and middle-income earners. But Novara Media takes a single measure out of 34. This is a textbook case of selection bias.

There is nothing wrong with critique, but there are good sources that explain the entire German package in more depth, and many of them are easier accessible as they aren’t hiding behind Cloudflare as Novara Media does if I may say so.

This is bad, but Novara Media is using such news while at the same time hailing China for its policies, although Chinese social welfare and labour conditions are far behind Germany’s or anywhere else in Western democracies. This is a highly biased anti-democratic medium in my opinion.

@plyth

Do you read your own links? The last one from Oxford Energy is a report published in 2020 (!) about the 14th fyp that has ended (and this is even the better part of your comment as it doesn’t even foster your own argument).

Here is another analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air:

The power sector target is weak. The target for non-fossil sources to provide 50% of power generation by 2030 still leaves roughly half of China’s electricity generation coming from fossil fuels. Starting from the plan’s 2025 baseline of 42.3% non-fossil generation, if total power generation grows by 5% per year, total generation would be about 27.6% higher by 2030. Under a 50% non-fossil share, fossil fuel generation, especially from coal, could still rise by around 10.6% over the period and the target would still be met. The plan reiterates that coal consumption should peak during the 15th FYP period, but it has no quantitative cap on coal generation or capacity, nor any explicit roadmap for phasing down coal.

The new carbon intensity target for the power sector is even more conservative. The plan requires power sector carbon emissions per unit of generation to fall by more than 10% from 2025 level by 2030. Directionally, that is positive. But it does not imply an absolute fall in power-sector emissions. With 5% annual growth in power generation, a 10% reduction in carbon intensity would still allow power sector carbon emissions to increase by roughly 15% over the period, or almost 3% per year. To keep absolute power-sector emissions flat by 2030, carbon intensity would need to fall by roughly 22% if power generation grows by 5% per year. That makes the target look modest compared with recent progress. Ember estimates that China’s power sector carbon intensity fell to 525gCO2/kWh in 2025, down 5% from 2024. China’s official 2024 national electricity carbon footprint factor also fell by 6.9% year on year. [Emphasis mine.]

Addition: And, again, the Chinese Communist Party’s own 15th five-year plan says that fossil fuel energy consumption would increase by 8-10%, reversing the slow-down in fossil fuel energy consumption during the 14th FYP period. At the same time, China’s own goals for non-fossil energy additions would see China’s annual green energy additions fall by more than half by 2030.

I provided the link already above, but here again.

Also, it’s easy to find the information from alternative sources.

The West has long called on China to stop supporting Russia.

China, the EU, and many (not all) countries and regions planned to reach its peak, but it is not enough. This is one part the linked report says.

Again, China is among the countries most behind. I provided all the links. What you are doing is repeating the same propaganda over and again. If you don’t come up with something related to reality, I end this conversation.