Generative AI and Digital Necromancy: Bringing the Dead Back to Life

Generative AI, including large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT and image and video generators like DALL·E 2, is revolutionizing the way we interact with the deceased. This technology, often referred to as “digital necromancy,” has sparked debates about its ethical implications and cultural boundaries.

The Rise of Digital Necromancy

In 2010, advancements in deepfake technology allowed for the resurrection of iconic figures like Bruce Lee, Michael Jackson, and Tupac Shakur through video projection. Initially, generative AI was limited to film and music production companies with significant resources. However, the introduction of ChatGPT in late 2022 changed the game, enabling individuals to communicate with their deceased loved ones using AI models trained on their messages and emails.

Ethical Concerns and Cultural Boundaries

The idea of regularly interacting with digital simulations of the dead raises ethical concerns for some. The concept of AI-assisted necromancy is viewed with suspicion and seen as crossing boundaries. Is it a cause for genuine worry?

The Continuation of Remembering the Dead

Throughout history, people have maintained connections with the deceased through text, images, and artifacts. Sentimental value has been placed on portraits, photographs, and monuments as ways to remember and honor the departed. AI technology simply provides a modern alternative to these age-old practices.

The Potential of Artificial Intelligence

New AI companies specializing in digital necromancy leverage previous projects and utilize written messages, audio recordings, and visual media provided by customers to train their AI models. These models can then generate sophisticated interactions with the deceased through text, images, and audio.

Concerns and Debates

Debra Bassett, a researcher in digital life, highlights concerns about the potential manipulation of the deceased’s digital presence. There are fears that AI-generated responses may make the deceased appear to say things they didn’t say while alive. On the other hand, some argue that these digital interactions are not genuine encounters with the dead but rather impostors.

While exploitation and manipulation are valid concerns, it is important to remember that personal letters, photographs, and videos of the deceased are typically treated as channels to access memories rather than direct representations of their voices and thoughts.

Exaggerated Public Concern

Public anxiety surrounding digital necromancy may be exaggerated. The report by Professor Michael Mayer and his team from the University of Liverpool suggests that the worries about this technology are blown out of proportion.

Sources: ScienceAlert