I heard about this in the radio the other day. People pay a monthly fee for an AI that becomes your “digital partner”.
The reasoning behind, according to them, is that the AI is less dangerous than a human partner because they can’t cheat, can’t abuse you…
And I can’t but wonder where did we take the wrong turn to end up here. Because while I can understand that people can go through some traumatic shit that would made them wary of the opposite sex, considering a machine your sentimental partner can only lead to some extremely fucked up scenarios.
I think it’s also a symptom of our society overvaluing romantic relationships and the nuclear family, at the expense of friends, other family, and general community. When you combine that with the traumatic experiences some have in romantic relationships, they have nowhere to turn to for emotional connection and support.
Back in pre-agriculture days, humans would sit around every night by the fire and interact with the rest of the tribe. That’s what we spent 99% of human history doing. Farming isolated us from the tribe and put every family in their own house. Then the Industrial Age gave the family distractions like newspapers, radios, and movies. Currently we’ve got a phone to distract us all the time.
Even then, there’s a difference between having a bracelet or a necklace someone gifted you, versus owning multiple living spaces while others in your community die due to exposures to the elements.
I don’t remember where I read it, but there’s a concept of private property vs personal property. Personal property is your stuff you use, like your bracelet or your bowl. Private property is your apartment building.
Rumour has it that some American Native tribes had zero personal property, down to things like tools. The concept just didn’t exist, everything was communal.
Exactly - loading all your need for companionship, relationships and love onto a single person and relationship (and type of relationship) is guaranteed to cause disappointment- it’s too much for person. I’ve been happily married for years, and key to that is other friends, companions and family.
I mean, media has depicted this sort of relationship for pawbably as long as sci-fi has been around? Think like the Star Trek: Original Series episode “What Are Little Girls Made Of?” that depicted sex robots ~60yrs ago. This was always coming, it’s just technology might finally be getting there in a rudimentary way.
While I agree with your point of view… Do we really trust the present AI providers, in the present economic system, to not pull some bullshit that ends in extremely fucked up scenarios?
You are right, my main comment didn’t include this part. When I was talking to other users I developed the argument a bit more and I realized that my first comment didn’t convey my argument fully. While I was writing the first comment, it made sense in my head, but the reason why I considered it an awfully bad idea was not clear.
Do you think openAI or Google, or X or whatever billionaire behind the AI involved in these “relationships” cares even minimally about the mental well-being of these people?
The problem is not just the dating an AI thing, but who is managing these AIs.
Do you think openAI or Google, or X or whatever billionaire behind the AI involved in these “relationships” cares even minimally about the mental well-being of these people?
No, but I wager neither does anyone else, or they wouldn’t be dating a datacenter.
The bizarre thing is, some of them do understand how LLMs work. There was that article about a married woman with an LLM boyfriend. She’s very active on Reddit (edit: or at least was until a month ago), and based on her comments I saw back when the article was published, she seems to know perfectly well that it’s all just a statistical model of smoke and mirrors, and yet continues with the extreme emotional (and financial) investment 🤷
It happens multiple times in Star Trek. They kind of breeze by it but Riker was so infatuated with his holodeck girlfriend when he was captured by Romulans they thought she was a real person.
Thing is, it never seemed unbelievable in Star Trek. Just, a kinda weird thing that people will do.
That is a dangerous assumption. The ones controlling the models can definitely manipulate a person through some minor tweaks which would definitely count as abuse. And it’s it more polygamous since they’re probably all using the same model? Not like each one has their own unique model
Not to be that person but… source? I don’t follow this topic much, but I imagine its actually a very small amount of peolle being amplified into a way bigger issue than it actually is.
We have engaged in gender centric tribalism for the last decades. Feminism, counter-movements, topped with a bunch of social media induced dissociation and social isolation.
Now women are scared of men, men are scared of women, and everyone is lonely and miserable.
What the fuck. You’re taking one anecdote and generalizing it to the whole human race, and what’s more, you’re attributing it to some sort of “novel” gender differentiation, like that shit hasn’t existed since the times we all huddled in caves.
Oh i’m sorry, I forgot to specify that I’m not talking as an absolute, and that I am refererring to the western/capitalist cultural hemisphere and not uncontacted tribes or Islamic societies. Didn’t think of the average lemmy nitpicker deliberately interpreting any possible uncertainties in communication in the worst possible way.
I heard about this in the radio the other day. People pay a monthly fee for an AI that becomes your “digital partner”.
The reasoning behind, according to them, is that the AI is less dangerous than a human partner because they can’t cheat, can’t abuse you…
And I can’t but wonder where did we take the wrong turn to end up here. Because while I can understand that people can go through some traumatic shit that would made them wary of the opposite sex, considering a machine your sentimental partner can only lead to some extremely fucked up scenarios.
I think it’s also a symptom of our society overvaluing romantic relationships and the nuclear family, at the expense of friends, other family, and general community. When you combine that with the traumatic experiences some have in romantic relationships, they have nowhere to turn to for emotional connection and support.
Back in pre-agriculture days, humans would sit around every night by the fire and interact with the rest of the tribe. That’s what we spent 99% of human history doing. Farming isolated us from the tribe and put every family in their own house. Then the Industrial Age gave the family distractions like newspapers, radios, and movies. Currently we’ve got a phone to distract us all the time.
Don’t forget the glorious idea of private property!
People always had private property.
Remember kids: personal property IS NOT the same as private property.
Always seems like a stretch. Not all cultures had the concept
Even then, there’s a difference between having a bracelet or a necklace someone gifted you, versus owning multiple living spaces while others in your community die due to exposures to the elements.
Modern society is worthless.
I don’t remember where I read it, but there’s a concept of private property vs personal property. Personal property is your stuff you use, like your bracelet or your bowl. Private property is your apartment building.
Rumour has it that some American Native tribes had zero personal property, down to things like tools. The concept just didn’t exist, everything was communal.
They would also outcast and shun most of the asshats.
We do the same, just nowadays most of the asshats self-shun and that’s how we get things like wireborn parasocial relationships.
Exactly - loading all your need for companionship, relationships and love onto a single person and relationship (and type of relationship) is guaranteed to cause disappointment- it’s too much for person. I’ve been happily married for years, and key to that is other friends, companions and family.
This is a good expansion on that idea. The Four Loves
I mean, media has depicted this sort of relationship for pawbably as long as sci-fi has been around? Think like the Star Trek: Original Series episode “What Are Little Girls Made Of?” that depicted sex robots ~60yrs ago. This was always coming, it’s just technology might finally be getting there in a rudimentary way.
“Pawbably”. Adorable.
Thank you! :3
While I agree with your point of view… Do we really trust the present AI providers, in the present economic system, to not pull some bullshit that ends in extremely fucked up scenarios?
Oh, absolutely not. That didn’t seem to be the crux of your argument though.
You are right, my main comment didn’t include this part. When I was talking to other users I developed the argument a bit more and I realized that my first comment didn’t convey my argument fully. While I was writing the first comment, it made sense in my head, but the reason why I considered it an awfully bad idea was not clear.
People are lonely and dating sucks. Humans provided a similar one sided relationship service as well. (Sugar babies come to mind)
Yes, yes. And yes.
But
Do you think openAI or Google, or X or whatever billionaire behind the AI involved in these “relationships” cares even minimally about the mental well-being of these people?
The problem is not just the dating an AI thing, but who is managing these AIs.
No, but I wager neither does anyone else, or they wouldn’t be dating a datacenter.
I’m not really sure these people fully understand what they are doing or they wouldn’t be doing it at all.
The bizarre thing is, some of them do understand how LLMs work. There was that article about a married woman with an LLM boyfriend. She’s very active on Reddit (edit: or at least was until a month ago), and based on her comments I saw back when the article was published, she seems to know perfectly well that it’s all just a statistical model of smoke and mirrors, and yet continues with the extreme emotional (and financial) investment 🤷
Oh totally agree. This is a corporation problem.
I’d rather choose a bear than choose an AI…
It happens multiple times in Star Trek. They kind of breeze by it but Riker was so infatuated with his holodeck girlfriend when he was captured by Romulans they thought she was a real person.
Thing is, it never seemed unbelievable in Star Trek. Just, a kinda weird thing that people will do.
That is a dangerous assumption. The ones controlling the models can definitely manipulate a person through some minor tweaks which would definitely count as abuse. And it’s it more polygamous since they’re probably all using the same model? Not like each one has their own unique model
it also requires zero effort on their part
Like a normal relationship if you’re beautiful enough …
Shallow relations have always existed.
it also can’t love you, rendering the entire exercise pointless
Wasn’t there a guy who married his 3DS dating game girlfriend a while back? I’m not sure this is exactly a new phenomenon.
It was more of an oddity. Right now, the numbers are not just “some random guy” but something in much higher numbers.
Not to be that person but… source? I don’t follow this topic much, but I imagine its actually a very small amount of peolle being amplified into a way bigger issue than it actually is.
I’m trying to find an English source as the one I can offer right now is in Spanish. If i find another one, I’ll post it, meanwhile, this is my source: https://cadenaser.com/nacional/2025/02/28/es-rentable-y-da-mucho-miedo-la-reflexion-de-javier-ruiz-sobre-las-parejas-de-mentira-cadena-ser/
apparently, there’s this Replika company that offers artificial boyfriends and they are growing rapidly.
Wait replika is still around?
Where did we take the wrong turn? look around at our patriarchy-driven gender regime Are you serious?
We have engaged in gender centric tribalism for the last decades. Feminism, counter-movements, topped with a bunch of social media induced dissociation and social isolation.
Now women are scared of men, men are scared of women, and everyone is lonely and miserable.
What the fuck. You’re taking one anecdote and generalizing it to the whole human race, and what’s more, you’re attributing it to some sort of “novel” gender differentiation, like that shit hasn’t existed since the times we all huddled in caves.
Touch some grass.
Oh i’m sorry, I forgot to specify that I’m not talking as an absolute, and that I am refererring to the western/capitalist cultural hemisphere and not uncontacted tribes or Islamic societies. Didn’t think of the average lemmy nitpicker deliberately interpreting any possible uncertainties in communication in the worst possible way.