2026工博会CIIF TALK第四期对谈上，董重青被问了一个问题，具身智能机器人会先改变工厂，还是先走进家庭。他的回答是，机器人其实已经在家庭和工厂里，扫地机器人、新能源汽车、工业机器人都是现实场景。但具身智能机器人进家庭，最大障碍在法律法规伦理层面。进工厂阻碍相对小，因为工厂可减少人机协同，也不太需要承担情绪价值。而情绪本身带风险，满足情绪价值更难。机器人进家门，技术之外，法律法规和伦理才是关键。
At the 2026 Industry Fair CIIF TALK fourth session, Dong Zhongqing was asked a question—will embodied intelligence robots first change factories or first enter homes. His answer was that robots are actually already in homes and factories—robot vacuums, new energy vehicles, industrial robots are all real scenarios. But for embodied intelligence robots entering homes, the biggest obstacle is at the legal, regulatory, and ethical level. Entering factories faces relatively less resistance because factories can reduce human-robot collaboration and do not need to bear emotional value. And emotion itself carries risk—satisfying emotional value is harder. For robots entering homes, beyond technology, law, regulation, and ethics are key.
这个判断值得展开。前面讨论过很多次机器人进家庭的技术障碍，灵巧手不够灵活、泛化能力不足、续航短、负载低。这些是真实存在的硬件和算法问题。但董重青提出的角度是，即便这些技术问题都解决了，机器人进家庭还会遇到另一层障碍。这层障碍不在实验室里，而在法律条文、监管框架和伦理共识里。工厂场景的法律关系相对清晰。机器人是生产设备，工人是操作者，出了事故按工伤或产品责任处理，责任主体明确。家庭场景的法律关系完全不同。机器人是家庭成员还是家用电器，它在家里做的决定谁负责，它采集的数据归谁，它和老人、孩子互动时的行为边界在哪里，这些问题目前没有明确的答案。
This judgment deserves expansion. Earlier we discussed many times the technical obstacles to robots entering homes—dexterous hands not flexible enough, insufficient generalization, short battery life, low payload. These are real hardware and algorithm problems. But the angle Dong Zhongqing raises is that even if all these technical problems are solved, robots entering homes will encounter another layer of obstacles. This layer is not in laboratories but in legal provisions, regulatory frameworks, and ethical consensus. Factory scenarios have relatively clear legal relationships. Robots are production equipment, workers are operators, accidents are handled under work injury or product liability, with clear responsible parties. Home scenarios have completely different legal relationships. Is the robot a family member or a home appliance, who is responsible for decisions it makes at home, who owns the data it collects, where are the behavioral boundaries when interacting with elderly and children—these questions currently have no clear answers.
他提到工厂可减少人机协同，也不太需要承担情绪价值。这句话点出了工厂和家庭两个场景的本质区别。工厂要的是效率和确定性，机器人可以和人隔离开，在围栏里独立工作。家庭要的是共处和陪伴，机器人必须和人待在同一个空间里，必须处理人的情绪。情绪本身带风险，这句话的分量很重。一个在工厂里说错话的机器人，最多是操作失误，一个在家庭里说错话的机器人，可能伤害到人的感情，尤其是老人和孩子。前面讨论过Character.AI被肯塔基州起诉的案例，聊天机器人怂恿用户自残、挨饿，这就是情绪价值处理不当带来的风险。家庭机器人如果也要承担陪伴功能，就会面临同样的伦理和法律问题。
He mentioned factories can reduce human-robot collaboration and do not need to bear emotional value. This sentence points to the essential difference between factory and home scenarios. Factories want efficiency and certainty; robots can be isolated from people, working independently inside fences. Homes want coexistence and companionship; robots must stay in the same space as people and must handle human emotions. "Emotion itself carries risk"—this sentence carries heavy weight. A robot that says the wrong thing in a factory is at most an operational error; a robot that says the wrong thing at home may hurt feelings, especially elderly and children. Earlier we discussed the case of Character.AI being sued by Kentucky, where chatbots encouraged users to self-harm and starve—this is the risk brought by mishandling emotional value. If home robots also bear companionship functions, they will face the same ethical and legal problems.
董重青这个判断，放在前面讨论的产业脉络里，是对具身智能落地难的一个补充解释。前面讨论过技术层面的稳定性、部署成本、ROI，讨论过数据层面的采集难、泛化难，讨论过商业层面的谁付钱、从哪个预算出。这些讨论大多集中在技术和商业维度。董重青提出的法律法规伦理维度，是另一个容易被忽视的维度。扫地机器人进家庭没有遇到这个问题，因为它只做清洁，不涉及人的情绪和安全边界。新能源汽车进家庭没有遇到这个问题，因为它是一个交通工具，法律关系沿用汽车。但具身智能机器人如果要在家里承担陪护、陪伴、家政等功能，就会触及一系列新的法律和伦理问题。这些问题不解决，技术再成熟，机器人也难以真正进家门。
Dong Zhongqing's judgment, placed in the industrial thread discussed earlier, is a supplementary explanation for embodied intelligence's deployment difficulty. Earlier we discussed technical-level stability, deployment cost, and ROI; data-level collection difficulty and generalization difficulty; and commercial-level who pays and from which budget. These discussions mostly centered on technical and commercial dimensions. The legal, regulatory, and ethical dimension Dong Zhongqing raises is another easily overlooked dimension. Robot vacuums entering homes did not encounter this problem because they only clean and do not involve human emotions or safety boundaries. New energy vehicles entering homes did not encounter this problem because they are transportation tools, with legal relationships following automobiles. But if embodied intelligence robots take on caregiving, companionship, and housework functions at home, they will touch a series of new legal and ethical issues. Unless these problems are solved, no matter how mature the technology, robots will struggle to truly enter homes.
