A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
It's definitely not healthy, but this isn't going to fix the birth rate.
Correlation <> causation meme
This probably won’t fix anything, but hopefully stops it from contributing to the issue further down the line
…meme
It’s clearly not a healthy thing to exist.
It is the worst of para social relationships, amped up by 100x. And is only going to get more exploitative.
But just on a level of building up the skills to have a relationship, it’s training kids to expect someone who always says yes, always affirms them, will never challenge them to grow…
Relationships are hard. You have to learn to love people and how to do that, and you have to learn to not be selfish, which is the opposite of what LLMs tend to encourage.
Most importantly, you have to love imperfect people. And confront that you are imperfect as well. And thats ok!
Make babies! It's illegal to be lonely!
And wasn't China very recently concerned about their birthrate being too high? One Child Policy?
Now they're already concerned about their birth rate being too low?
The one-child policy was abolished in 2015, but birth rates have continued to decline after that. They currently have one of the world's lowest fertility rates.
You probably joking, but that actually a thing in China and was a thing in USSR
6% of income? Still much cheaper than a kid!
It says that it was proposed... We propose a lot of bills that never pass here in the US. I'm not sure how China's laws are setup but Wikipedia doesn't say that it was ever implemented.
That will fix it.
AI girl/boyfriends are fucking addictions latching onto people vulnerbilities.
This ban is nothing but good, but no one thing will fix child birth rates, nor the reason for the addiction in the first place, I'll agree with that.
It is funny to me that china can pretend not to be a capitalist nation while displaying every symptom of capitalism.
You know what else fixes the birth rate? Making life less shitty and giving people enough money to be able to raise children.
In the meantime, negative birth rate is just self-correction of asshole dictatorships. Can't make money line go up if birth line go down.
Sperm counts are tanking worldwide while PFAS chems are being legalized and clean energy projects are shut down in favor of fossil fuels. Nature doesn't gaf, and will correct the unhealthy scenario. Humans are not the fittest if they destroy their own species by toxifying the environment. There's only so much we can do with a sperm count of zero. Even in a handmaid's tale scenario, a multiple of zero is zero.
There's a lot of problems with this, and declining birth rates of the most invasive species on Earth isn't one of them.
Bro think about Chinese economy please. Economy needs to survive bro..... Let go of your imaginery girl bro..... Treating your actual girlfriend like human is not mandatory bro...... Do it for patriotism bro....
Can't the AI companies charge more while using the GPU heat to warm the in vitro babies they're growing in vats?
I'm pretty sure these babies will get lots of love from their AI parents.
I think a lot of world problems would be solved if these things were encouraged instead. If someone needs their romantic partner to be a mindless sycophant, I would rather them have that with a machine than try to abuse a human person into serving them as would be more traditional. More children being born in situations other than exploitation and manipulation could only be a good thing.
You need to think of human beings as less binary good and binary evil.
I'm sure people who abuse their family members have plenty of good qualities as well. I'm not sure how that's relevant to what I said.
And for every 1 monster you remove from society by locking them in an AI mind prison, you'll ruin the lives of a hundred innocent people.
This is the same logic used for child sex dolls and other material consumed by paedophiles
Yeah, sure.
And I wouldn't be so pissed at Epstein and Trump and the rest of the pedophile class if they were just trafficking sex dolls.
I kind of think everywhere probably should, that's probably the strangest thing it's like falling in love with a microwave.
Good.
this will just spin up a blackmarket waifu market
At least if more people ended up doing this on their own hardware with open source software, it would cut off a lot of the opportunities it presents for companies to abuse people's privacy and manipulate them.
Yup. At this point, the only sensible model is harm reduction. I’m not happy about where we are, but we do need to be realistic about it.
I'm a bit confused as to why this is related to 1984. I understand banning AI “boyfriends” and “girlfriends” could be seen as a form of censorship, though. But I also think it’s kind of a good thing; some people genuinely believed these AI were their real relationships and might avoid any real relationships.
It is a sarcastic observation of the shallow and reductive take that "nineteen eighty four is when the government does something i don't like!".
I find it less likely that anyone who uses lemmy would sincerely think it is actually good that people become parasocially addicted to a hallucination box that has been finely tuned to lie to them as convincingly as possible.
However, I admit this inference is doing a lot of gravy lifting; this is, after all, why Poe's Law exists. There are so very many excessively dim, narrow-minded, and ignorant people who WOULD indeed unironically cry "1984!!" whenever any government does anything that such a person being right here, right now, is always a statistically significant possibility that cannot be dismissed out of hand without risk.
I am giving the person to whom you are replying a generous benefit of a doubt, to be fair...
