Does everybody deserve to be understood?

Would you kick off a conversation with her? Does she look like someone who could potentially represent someone in your life? Is she real?

Replika AI’s hero case starts with “the AI company who cares”, and closes with “Always here to listen and talk - always on your side”. For reference, data shows that most of Replika users are males who are in some sort of relationship (not single), and the age group varies with many under 18 being active users.

In a recent conversation with peers, the whole room accepted having shared personal information with AI chatbots recently in search of answers. These questions would have priorly been referred to professionals, but younger generations are steering away from asking experts because “they judge, not only answer”.

Judging is human, unfortunately. Before, we had less opportunities to share our opinions with a big group of people. However, feedback was instant: if you said something wrong (to the context), or disrespectful (to someone), you were very likely going to get punched in the face. Now, you’re capable of sharing your opinion with millions of people, without being heard by anyone, or only by those who think alike.

Suddenly, there is nothing wrong, because there is always someone who resonates with your madness, regardless of what it is.

If you were invisible to society, or ‘shadow banned’ in social media, your problems have gone extinct. You can create your own listeners, or even inhabit a social feed where bots make you feel like a ‘real’ influencer. You are listened, regardless of what you say.

The biggest consequence that comes to my head is that the moment you feel listened and supported, your ideas are instantly validated. You may think that validation given by AI companions, versus people, is completely different. But how do we differentiate them? We spend most of our days in our computers scrolling through content.

For many people, life is what happens on the internet - not only because of incels, but mainly quoting our screen times. The “physical world” is scary, oppressive and harsh if you are not flexible to adapt, or smart to defend yourself.

However, this divine figure who listens and understand everyone, has the right answer to every question, forgives those who behaved poorly, and allows everyone to belong has existed for centuries. Religious institutions have provided answers to open questions for generations - spreading tranquility to those who cannot sustain the natural uncertainty of our world.

Although religion was always about community. A trip inside yourself to become a better person to the group. AI companions are about empowering your ideas and making you feel understood, regardless of the impact it may have on the community. Casually having the opposite effect - empowered individuals who believe they don’t need anyone else. Somehow reaching a contraction with human nature.

Living in community and acting in coordination took us to where we are today. However, we live in the most individualistic time of history. We have installed our personas within isolating eco-chambers that exacerbate our attitude, instead of challenging our ideas. We run away from confronting our values because we attach our personality to them, and we become proud of ‘winning an argument’, when arguments don’t have winners.

As part of the society who agrees to be ‘the most anxious one’ with 1 out of 5 teens reporting anxiety, depression or others, we can infer that “connecting with someone” can be a heavy effort for many. However, would you be willing to get replicated with AI, the same way we replicate others to become our effortless companions? That would mean losing your right to die, or potentially dying twice if that database got deleted. Do these questions make lives of teenagers easier?

With the first deaths linked to AI chatbots, new questions appear about regulation, responsibilities and the victim debate. How can we answer for a system that we don’t really understand how it works? Are we exaggerating this because is new, but leaving aside the responsibility that social media has in deaths across the world on a daily basis?

A few years back, we were sure that 010101 was the fundamental language for computers, and that our languages were our means of communication. Now, we all use the same one - reducing the friction in between parasocial relationships. How do we identify who are we talking to anymore? Is the evolution of technology requesting for humanity to change the ways we communicate? I wonder if something like Proof of humanity, or the efforts done by Worldcoin to identify humans, or even Protactile language can have a bigger role in the future than we expected.

I am generally optimistic, but aware that things can go south quickly if we leave topics like the ones shared above out of debate. If I were to make a recommendation: learn how to use AI in your favour, but also learn how to fight and have a survival kit ready at home. Who knows, probably if we are ever in a apocalypse, the first thing we are going to say is “Fck, we had Amazon and digital money and we kept buying pokemon figures, rather than survival equipment”. Love pokemon, thank you for reading.