I think the really interesting thing about this article is the double focus that you wanted to highlight: on the one hand that of users, who have all the freedom and who should never be misjudged for the consumption choices they make on certain platforms; on the other, companies, which precisely want to be the antidote but also the cause of the problem. This is the true fulcrum of the discussion: this double nature which in this way also tries to shed its 'guilt' by presenting itself in a new light without however taking into account - also in terms of consequences of consumption and public opinion, as well as value reputational and economic - where it all began, trying not to make online environments something that stimulates people more positively, but rather trying to create a solution that is of the same type and of the same 'mesh' as the problem. Thank you for sharing it.
I loved it, especially the first part. I even made a cross-posting in Spanish.
Even in the Far East (Japan, China and Korea) the authorities complain that young people no longer want to have boyfriends/girlfriends and get married. Tokyo has launched an app to promote marriages.
I read that there are 2 modes of communication with them: Text and phone conversations:
-Text-based interaction: Users can text their AI girlfriends and receive instant replies. This mode is similar to texting a friend or partner, with the AI able to maintain a coherent and engaging conversation over time.
-Voice communication: Some AI girlfriends offer voice interaction, either through phone calls or voice notes. This adds a new dimension to the experience as users can hear a voice response, making the interaction more personal and intimate.
In the future, maybe AI girlfriends will be accessible through more modes of communication.
I didn´t know this, but there are a lot of companies producing AI Girlfriends.
I researched a little more and I see that they are virtual entities created using sophisticated AI algorithms. They are designed to simulate human-like interactions and provide companionship through text and voice communication. These AI entities are not just programmed for basic responses; they are able to learn, adapt and personalise their interactions based on the user's preferences and behaviour.
It may be the "revenge of the third world". That the continent with the fastest growing population, Africa, is needed to have young people in our cities and, above all, our countryside. That, instead of rejecting them, we pay them to come to our countries and have children.
Social media, AI companions and so on, are pale mockeries of the original behaviours they attempt to replicate. What makes them addictive is being deprived of real world social behaviour. Alienation is a deeper problem than just the internet era. It's roots stretch back into industrial age urbanisation and commodification of labour.
I think the last line of your essay says it all - capitalism optimises all the equations for profit extraction rather than the things which most humans value.
I clicked the link because I love Mucha’s art, but I ended up really enjoying the article. I recently wrote a short story (Three Dots) sort of exploring the same territory. Exciting/scary times ahead!
I sense that the most pragmatic approach is to regard all this as a Vulcan or a Q. Try to be as detached, objective and amused as possible. Realize that what’s really going on here is that it’s all a new set of parameters for evolution, via another channel. Not all the baby sea turtles make it to the ocean. Must don’t.
Evolution is not inevitability, not an unstructured stochastic process, a simple roll of the dice. It is a chaotic system which generates endlessly bifurcating and diverging attractors. Which path we branch off along is a decision formed from all the countless decisions of organisms. A self selecting process.
Detachment may make you feel better in the short term, but involvement is the legacy of our ancestors and our responsibility to our descendants, whether "organic" or "artificial".
I actually agree with you. We are fortunate in that as thinking beings we can now shape and direct our evolution. The trick is to employ this thinking after contemplating how best to approach it. What’s “best” can also be a rather transitory state.
We need to merge substrates.
Brain Computer Interfaces (BCI) are a beginning. Eventually the biological or meat components are going to be entirely outclassed, but perhaps worth maintaining, much as we maintain flora, fauna and green space. Why? For reflection and integration with a larger universe. We won’t bring much to the cognitive or consciousness table much later, but that’s okay. We’d shrink in importance to something akin to a lining or an appendix. Or we’d be like amped up squirrels. Yet there’s no need to cut out an appendix or kill a squirrel, unless they become a pest. But on the other hand, no super squirrel is going to run the federal reserve, alter the tax code, or revamp the bureau of standards. But the molecular dynamics of our physiology and how we interrelate with other artifacts might be of interest.
I hope this becomes an on-going report for TAB. A relevant datapoint: I know at least three AI startups that pivoted (rather “defaulted”) into some form of AI girlfriends. It’s better business.
Right. I imagine retention is higher and people are willing to pay more for that kind of service than, say, a work assistant. Monetizing love and loneliness has never been easier.
I know you're right, but sheesh. What about the story and legacy set down by our elders? I know how my grandparents met and my parents to how my wife and I met. You've got divine intervention involved with destinies still being unfolded. AI? Empty of all of it.
I am of the 188th generation of Adam & Eve. All of the stories and traditions on the tapestry of genealogies are too high a price to pay just for a piece of plastic. We all are part of the story of mankind.
But the reason I mentioned that episode of Futurama is that it relates to your comment specifically. In it, the characters watch an educational video which explains how, in the past, humans dating robots led to the collapse of civilisation - it turned out that the only reason humans strive to do anything difficult is to impress someone else in order to get laid.
Men already "left" their wives w porn. The % of sexless marriages skyrocketed due to them screwing the phone. I think single men much rather have a tangible silicone version than chatting w the bot thing lol
The problem is not just about sex and romantic relationships.
Many people these days would literally rather get likes and short-lived views from random people than chat with real people (even if the real people are random at first, social relationships start somewhere).
It's like people think you're out to hurt them or ask them for money lol. Or they are just too scared for some reason.
I remember the old days where chatting with friends and family was the norm, as well as meeting them a few times a week.
I thought "I am just getting old" but I see these behaviors in the younger people in my life too (family members).
wow this one is very dark but ... looks right on the trajectory. Sexual pleasure is built by evolution for us to have sex and reproduce (why would want to do this disgusting and scary thing if there was not the pleasure reward ;-)). Since the first man realised that it was possible to hack that (getting out before ejaculation, first gen condoms) then we've been trying to the pleasure without the offsprings.
Then we realised that representations of sex could lead us to similar pleasures - novels, pictures, movies and internet made porn easily accessible 24/7 - with sexual performances that were setting the bar to a level unattainable to a normal person. Hence more difficult to do with a real person.
It's another layer. Tinder already made consensual sex super easy, now this will not even need sex with another human being.
I think it begs another question "now that we can have everything that we want and dont need to struggle to mate, interact, work, what are we going to do with our lifes?". We are not wired for abundance. We became sick and fat once we did not have to use physical exercice to survive. We may become stupid and just hooked on dopamine when all our desires are fulfilled with no effort.
... and we re not wired for happiness either. Maybe we will build AI companions that will help us interact with each other? Sex bots that we can invite to play ? And factories for making babies ? But then who will want / be capable of raising a child if it's even impossible to have a relation with someone from the opposite sex. The ultimate decoupling from our natural meaning - reproduction.
What is interesting in your post is you point to the dark side of progress. We're all chanting that with AI we will cure all diseases, put food on the table for every human, fix climate change, go to mars, etc. etc. and it may be true, but if everybody is depressed and dysfunctional, what for? (although the guy starving in Africa may think differently). I can already see that in the state of politics. All this technical progress ahead and Republicans want to forbid contraception ?!? And we're having wars ?
And we're having wars... More dangerous than ever before.
All this progress and this is where we are. I don't deny there are important advances and they're worth reiterating (e.g. anything about healthcare or sustenance) but let's please also not deny there are many advances that do us a lot of harm. The reason is simple: monetary incentives move progress, sometimes it's a hit, sometimes it's a miss.
Depending on how you look at it, humans have a long tradition of made-up relationships.
If you're cynical about religion, you might view any connection to gods or God as pure imagination.
Some people visit the gravestones of their ancestors to "communicate" with them.
One reason we build statues of famous dead people is to bring them into our world, to have a kind of "in-person" relationship with them. When I go to a new city, I will visit certain gravestones and statues.
Some artists have human muses. The muse, often a woman, is put on a pedestal by the artist, treated like a demigod, and provides the artist with artistic inspiration. The muse can do no wrong.
The painter Salvador Dali viewed Gala, his wife, as his muse. She cheated on him throughout their marriage. In a situation like this, the artist has a relationship with someone who doesn't really exist.
Napoleon Hill can come off as a bit of a charlatan, but he had his own "Cabinet of Invisible Counsellors." Hill imagined himself regularly talking to famous men, like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Napoleon Bonaparte, asking them for their insights (https://shorturl.at/SeaDm).
My brother had two imaginary friends when we were kids. I was a lazy child, so instead of making my own, I stole one of his.
Is it possible that an AI girlfriend is just another version of the made-up relationship that humans have been having for millennia?
What makes an AI girlfriend uniquely sinister compared to the imaginary relationships humans had in the past?
It's a bleak subject and an even bleaker future you've portrayed.
I think the really interesting thing about this article is the double focus that you wanted to highlight: on the one hand that of users, who have all the freedom and who should never be misjudged for the consumption choices they make on certain platforms; on the other, companies, which precisely want to be the antidote but also the cause of the problem. This is the true fulcrum of the discussion: this double nature which in this way also tries to shed its 'guilt' by presenting itself in a new light without however taking into account - also in terms of consequences of consumption and public opinion, as well as value reputational and economic - where it all began, trying not to make online environments something that stimulates people more positively, but rather trying to create a solution that is of the same type and of the same 'mesh' as the problem. Thank you for sharing it.
I loved it, especially the first part. I even made a cross-posting in Spanish.
Even in the Far East (Japan, China and Korea) the authorities complain that young people no longer want to have boyfriends/girlfriends and get married. Tokyo has launched an app to promote marriages.
I read that there are 2 modes of communication with them: Text and phone conversations:
-Text-based interaction: Users can text their AI girlfriends and receive instant replies. This mode is similar to texting a friend or partner, with the AI able to maintain a coherent and engaging conversation over time.
-Voice communication: Some AI girlfriends offer voice interaction, either through phone calls or voice notes. This adds a new dimension to the experience as users can hear a voice response, making the interaction more personal and intimate.
In the future, maybe AI girlfriends will be accessible through more modes of communication.
I didn´t know this, but there are a lot of companies producing AI Girlfriends.
I researched a little more and I see that they are virtual entities created using sophisticated AI algorithms. They are designed to simulate human-like interactions and provide companionship through text and voice communication. These AI entities are not just programmed for basic responses; they are able to learn, adapt and personalise their interactions based on the user's preferences and behaviour.
It may be the "revenge of the third world". That the continent with the fastest growing population, Africa, is needed to have young people in our cities and, above all, our countryside. That, instead of rejecting them, we pay them to come to our countries and have children.
Fast food and weight-loss drugs also come to mind. Both being regulated in the US by the same body, the FDA, is a particularly tragic irony. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/jan/06/will-weight-loss-drugs-kill-the-fast-food-business
Yeah good example!
Social media, AI companions and so on, are pale mockeries of the original behaviours they attempt to replicate. What makes them addictive is being deprived of real world social behaviour. Alienation is a deeper problem than just the internet era. It's roots stretch back into industrial age urbanisation and commodification of labour.
I think the last line of your essay says it all - capitalism optimises all the equations for profit extraction rather than the things which most humans value.
Seems relevant 🤣 https://www.interconnects.ai/p/model-merging
"the waifu research department" is a real group
Lol!
Seems everyone is in a situAIsionship these days...
I clicked the link because I love Mucha’s art, but I ended up really enjoying the article. I recently wrote a short story (Three Dots) sort of exploring the same territory. Exciting/scary times ahead!
Perhaps, in addition to going out and touching grass, we might hopefully touch each other.
I sense that the most pragmatic approach is to regard all this as a Vulcan or a Q. Try to be as detached, objective and amused as possible. Realize that what’s really going on here is that it’s all a new set of parameters for evolution, via another channel. Not all the baby sea turtles make it to the ocean. Must don’t.
Evolution is not inevitability, not an unstructured stochastic process, a simple roll of the dice. It is a chaotic system which generates endlessly bifurcating and diverging attractors. Which path we branch off along is a decision formed from all the countless decisions of organisms. A self selecting process.
Detachment may make you feel better in the short term, but involvement is the legacy of our ancestors and our responsibility to our descendants, whether "organic" or "artificial".
I actually agree with you. We are fortunate in that as thinking beings we can now shape and direct our evolution. The trick is to employ this thinking after contemplating how best to approach it. What’s “best” can also be a rather transitory state.
We need to merge substrates.
Brain Computer Interfaces (BCI) are a beginning. Eventually the biological or meat components are going to be entirely outclassed, but perhaps worth maintaining, much as we maintain flora, fauna and green space. Why? For reflection and integration with a larger universe. We won’t bring much to the cognitive or consciousness table much later, but that’s okay. We’d shrink in importance to something akin to a lining or an appendix. Or we’d be like amped up squirrels. Yet there’s no need to cut out an appendix or kill a squirrel, unless they become a pest. But on the other hand, no super squirrel is going to run the federal reserve, alter the tax code, or revamp the bureau of standards. But the molecular dynamics of our physiology and how we interrelate with other artifacts might be of interest.
I hope this becomes an on-going report for TAB. A relevant datapoint: I know at least three AI startups that pivoted (rather “defaulted”) into some form of AI girlfriends. It’s better business.
Right. I imagine retention is higher and people are willing to pay more for that kind of service than, say, a work assistant. Monetizing love and loneliness has never been easier.
I know you're right, but sheesh. What about the story and legacy set down by our elders? I know how my grandparents met and my parents to how my wife and I met. You've got divine intervention involved with destinies still being unfolded. AI? Empty of all of it.
I am of the 188th generation of Adam & Eve. All of the stories and traditions on the tapestry of genealogies are too high a price to pay just for a piece of plastic. We all are part of the story of mankind.
Our seed is part of a story. A womb much more than momentary pleasure.
I'm surprised no-one has yet mentioned that Futurama episode, "I Dated a Robot."
Or Plankton and Caren from SpongeBob.
They do make an interesting couple, don't they?
But the reason I mentioned that episode of Futurama is that it relates to your comment specifically. In it, the characters watch an educational video which explains how, in the past, humans dating robots led to the collapse of civilisation - it turned out that the only reason humans strive to do anything difficult is to impress someone else in order to get laid.
Beautiful image chosen btw.
Yeah, I'll experiment with a few things before deciding where I land.
Men already "left" their wives w porn. The % of sexless marriages skyrocketed due to them screwing the phone. I think single men much rather have a tangible silicone version than chatting w the bot thing lol
You'd be surprised!
would be nice to be a monthly paid chat bot w/o having to reveal myself lol pretending I am the 🤖💕
That would be absolutely illuminating!
The problem is not just about sex and romantic relationships.
Many people these days would literally rather get likes and short-lived views from random people than chat with real people (even if the real people are random at first, social relationships start somewhere).
It's like people think you're out to hurt them or ask them for money lol. Or they are just too scared for some reason.
I remember the old days where chatting with friends and family was the norm, as well as meeting them a few times a week.
I thought "I am just getting old" but I see these behaviors in the younger people in my life too (family members).
Society and people are changing fast.
wow this one is very dark but ... looks right on the trajectory. Sexual pleasure is built by evolution for us to have sex and reproduce (why would want to do this disgusting and scary thing if there was not the pleasure reward ;-)). Since the first man realised that it was possible to hack that (getting out before ejaculation, first gen condoms) then we've been trying to the pleasure without the offsprings.
Then we realised that representations of sex could lead us to similar pleasures - novels, pictures, movies and internet made porn easily accessible 24/7 - with sexual performances that were setting the bar to a level unattainable to a normal person. Hence more difficult to do with a real person.
It's another layer. Tinder already made consensual sex super easy, now this will not even need sex with another human being.
I think it begs another question "now that we can have everything that we want and dont need to struggle to mate, interact, work, what are we going to do with our lifes?". We are not wired for abundance. We became sick and fat once we did not have to use physical exercice to survive. We may become stupid and just hooked on dopamine when all our desires are fulfilled with no effort.
"We are not wired for abundance." That's the most important sentence right there. I can't answer your question but it does indeed not look pretty.
... and we re not wired for happiness either. Maybe we will build AI companions that will help us interact with each other? Sex bots that we can invite to play ? And factories for making babies ? But then who will want / be capable of raising a child if it's even impossible to have a relation with someone from the opposite sex. The ultimate decoupling from our natural meaning - reproduction.
What is interesting in your post is you point to the dark side of progress. We're all chanting that with AI we will cure all diseases, put food on the table for every human, fix climate change, go to mars, etc. etc. and it may be true, but if everybody is depressed and dysfunctional, what for? (although the guy starving in Africa may think differently). I can already see that in the state of politics. All this technical progress ahead and Republicans want to forbid contraception ?!? And we're having wars ?
And we're having wars... More dangerous than ever before.
All this progress and this is where we are. I don't deny there are important advances and they're worth reiterating (e.g. anything about healthcare or sustenance) but let's please also not deny there are many advances that do us a lot of harm. The reason is simple: monetary incentives move progress, sometimes it's a hit, sometimes it's a miss.
Depending on how you look at it, humans have a long tradition of made-up relationships.
If you're cynical about religion, you might view any connection to gods or God as pure imagination.
Some people visit the gravestones of their ancestors to "communicate" with them.
One reason we build statues of famous dead people is to bring them into our world, to have a kind of "in-person" relationship with them. When I go to a new city, I will visit certain gravestones and statues.
Some artists have human muses. The muse, often a woman, is put on a pedestal by the artist, treated like a demigod, and provides the artist with artistic inspiration. The muse can do no wrong.
The painter Salvador Dali viewed Gala, his wife, as his muse. She cheated on him throughout their marriage. In a situation like this, the artist has a relationship with someone who doesn't really exist.
Napoleon Hill can come off as a bit of a charlatan, but he had his own "Cabinet of Invisible Counsellors." Hill imagined himself regularly talking to famous men, like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Napoleon Bonaparte, asking them for their insights (https://shorturl.at/SeaDm).
My brother had two imaginary friends when we were kids. I was a lazy child, so instead of making my own, I stole one of his.
Is it possible that an AI girlfriend is just another version of the made-up relationship that humans have been having for millennia?
What makes an AI girlfriend uniquely sinister compared to the imaginary relationships humans had in the past?