I just listened to Jim Acosta’s interview with the AI version of Joaquin, the victim of the Parkland shooting, and his father.
I do not know how parents cope with such loss, and I do not think it is for anybody to question how anyone grieves the loss of a loved one - though I am skeptical that creating an AI version of a lost loved one is healthy or productive as relates to the grieving process.
From a journalistic and political perspective:
I was going to give Jim a hard time for somehow turning a five minute interview of an AI version of a deceased child into an interview of him, but I suspect that was in the programming of the AI…
And I appreciate he was doing this interview as a favor to the wishes of the father.
That said, the “interview” was an abomination, and something about it feels fundamentally sacrilegious and immoral. Creating an AI version of a dead child to literally use for political purposes.
To create social media accounts in the name and likeness of the deceased, where, as the technology advances, it will be indistinguishable from a real person in no time.
What could possibly go wrong?
Are we entering the realm of buying the rights to dead people, then programming AI to cause them to say things that fit the political/activist agendas of the rights holders?
Are we entering the realm of humans literally playing God?
This feels dirty and unholy.
And I’m also thoroughly convinced it is wildly unhealthy for the grieving process, and will only make it more difficult - and possibly turn into something of an addictive drug that will hamper any potential recovery from tragedy.
Link https://x.com/jeffstorobinsky/status/1952482348215496713?s=46