In recent years, with the increasing number of practitioners in new forms of employment, how to effectively protect their legitimate rights and interests has become a hot topic of social discussion. As the rights and interests of new industry practitioners' personal information are an important component of their legitimate rights and interests, while the "consent" of individuals fails to effectively protect their personal information, and is even alienated into the "valve" of algorithmic automated decision-making to squeeze practitioners in new forms of employment. The study concluded that "consent" cannot be ( completely ) replaced by Item 2, Paragraph 1, Article 13 of the Personal Information Protection Law, and that it remains the main source of legitimacy for platform operators to process personal information of practitioners in new forms of employment. The study suggests that in order to protect the rights and interests of practitioners' personal information, “consent” should be amended based on the classifi cation of personal information. The "consent" made by practitioners in new forms of employment based on general personal information should be a quasi-legal act, and its legal consequence is that the behavior of platform operators dealing with personal information is legitimate. The "separate consent" made by practitioners in new forms of employment based on sensitive personal information shall be a juristic act, which applies to the rules of juristic act