How to draft a will to avoid becoming an AI ghost—it’s not easy
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Some of us are naturally immune. Our simulacra would just lie around on the couch, borrow the toothpaste, eat all the strawberries and generally just be in the way. No one would pay for that.
Upvote
11
(12
/
-1)
This so much. The idea that AI will resurrect you somehow and reward/torture you for eternity just sounds like techbro Calvinism. I don't think we'll ever be able to "upload" our consciousness to the cloud, either. At best we could make a crappy copy.
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
Anti Jimmy
Ars Centurion
The real ghost of me would probably be irritated having competition from fake AI ghosts of me.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I think when i'm dead, I won't care if I end up becoming skibidi toilet from the grave. Thanks for putting that fear into me, Ashley.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Just waiting for the opposite to pop up: The deceased is narcissistic enough to have an "AI ghost" created during their lifetime, to grant them an ersatz "immortality." At least the family could turn it off, although I imagine they'd forfeit their inheritance due to a will clause in that case. Forced to keep the "AI avatar" around and interacting with it.
Weird timeline indeed.
Weird timeline indeed.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
I'm fairly certain that no one who is dead is going to care that there is an AI of them so this is all kind of silly.
You'll be dead. It will be irrelevant to you that there is someone with an AI likeness.
Your family may care, but only if you happen to be worth money and they could sell your AI likeness.
No one is going to go make an AI you just for giggles, you have to be someone that has something of value - which limits the caring here to mostly actors, voice actors especially, but beyond those 100 people that have names big enough to matter, no one cares about AI you.
You'll be dead. It will be irrelevant to you that there is someone with an AI likeness.
Your family may care, but only if you happen to be worth money and they could sell your AI likeness.
No one is going to go make an AI you just for giggles, you have to be someone that has something of value - which limits the caring here to mostly actors, voice actors especially, but beyond those 100 people that have names big enough to matter, no one cares about AI you.
Upvote
-9
(4
/
-13)
A human isn't a closed system, so yes, energy is lost at death, and not recovered. If you haven't seen it, you probably don't get that.
I've seen it hundreds of times. It's never pretty. And it's always final. That's how life is. Everything alive dies eventually. And that's the reality in which we (currently) live, and it isn't going to change.
I'd also say you're grossly overthinking this. If we can agree that this is a FUCKING STUPID IDEA in the first place, there's no nuance of behaviors that makes it better.
There is no "most likely" about it being psychologically devastating. Psychosis NEVER has a good outcome. Grief is a vital, necessary stage of accepting not only the mortality of a loved one, but of one's own mortality as well.
Most people have some level of difficulty with that from small to debilitating. Having a digital reminder of their loss will only make that difficulty worse. That's how it works for humans. One either accepts reality, or lives in delusion. There is no in between, even if they appear to be high functioning in their delusion. Psychologically, they are ill, and need treatment for it that includes accepting the reality of the loss that comes with death.
Upvote
12
(12
/
0)
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
That episode, along with The Entire History of You are two episodes that haunt me the most on a regular basis. Seeing this possibility becoming more possible with current technology is ... well, nightmare inducing.
I'd rather be fighting the robot dogs then contemplating either of the above scenarios.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Cue the philosphers, I guess. When does a human cease to be a human? And when do their "human rights" end?
Me? Whether or not my likeness is artificially "continued" past my death doesn't matter one bit to me. I'm dirtsville.
I'll ask my kids what they think and they can decide. They're the ones that unfortunately have to live with me...whether or not they would like to prolong the torture is solely their business.
Me? Whether or not my likeness is artificially "continued" past my death doesn't matter one bit to me. I'm dirtsville.
I'll ask my kids what they think and they can decide. They're the ones that unfortunately have to live with me...whether or not they would like to prolong the torture is solely their business.
Upvote
2
(3
/
-1)
Good.
Fuck future AI development. I am under no obligation to contribute data to their parasitic business model whilst I'm alive, and I'm damned if I'm going to do it once I'm dead, especially if my data is going to be used to pester my family with offers to create a ghoulish algorithmic puppet of me.
No, but the living do. And one of those rights is to determine what happens to their possessions and their mortal remains* after they die. Why should their data, history, and personal likeness be any different to their physical property or physical body?
Put another way, people want to be remembered for what they were, what they achieved, and what they stood for. Why should that legacy be free for any old company to plunder for their own purposes?
* may not be an actual legal right but it sure as hell is a socially recognised one.
Upvote
22
(22
/
0)
I came to the comments looking for someone referencing that episode and did not leave disappointed.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Yesterday's article on how AI chatbots tell users what they want to hear made me think that people would probably want to have an AI ghost of their loved one say not what they actually would have said, but what the user wishes they would have said.
Say that someone made an AI ghost of Grandpa and they share about their fiancée from a certain ethnic group. Grandpa had a lot of virtues, but unfortunately he was prejudiced against that ethnic group (as was the norm in his era) and the AI ghost of Grandpa vehemently opposes the marriage.
If the AI ghost has Grandpa's values intact, then a whole new wound is opened that never would have happened if an AI ghost wasn't created. But I suspect the user would want to alter the AI ghost so that Grandpa no longer holds these prejudices that are no longer acceptable and make it so that Grandpa instead wholeheartedly agrees with the user's values. At that point, would the AI ghost actually still be representative of Grandpa?
(There was an episode of The Orville called "Lasting Impressions" that explored this theme).
Say that someone made an AI ghost of Grandpa and they share about their fiancée from a certain ethnic group. Grandpa had a lot of virtues, but unfortunately he was prejudiced against that ethnic group (as was the norm in his era) and the AI ghost of Grandpa vehemently opposes the marriage.
If the AI ghost has Grandpa's values intact, then a whole new wound is opened that never would have happened if an AI ghost wasn't created. But I suspect the user would want to alter the AI ghost so that Grandpa no longer holds these prejudices that are no longer acceptable and make it so that Grandpa instead wholeheartedly agrees with the user's values. At that point, would the AI ghost actually still be representative of Grandpa?
(There was an episode of The Orville called "Lasting Impressions" that explored this theme).
Last edited:
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Possible problems with memorializing the dead with interactive digital avatars is that they may never let you forget.
Contrary to what most people think, you don’t really get over your loss over the death of a loved one. We tend to think we do or that we have come to terms with it, but what’s really happening is you’re just forgetting them. Not completely though, but eventually you do at least enough that you don’t think about it constantly. And this allows room for other things to come in.
It is this way to prevent humans from becoming completely paralyzed from tragedy.
And all of us will face a lot of tragedy because death is tragic and death is inevitable.
Contrary to what most people think, you don’t really get over your loss over the death of a loved one. We tend to think we do or that we have come to terms with it, but what’s really happening is you’re just forgetting them. Not completely though, but eventually you do at least enough that you don’t think about it constantly. And this allows room for other things to come in.
It is this way to prevent humans from becoming completely paralyzed from tragedy.
And all of us will face a lot of tragedy because death is tragic and death is inevitable.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
So, by default, those without these directives are subject to exploitation? How about bringing back Richard Nixon and having him exclaim that he is indeed, a crook. Or having a deceased child like JonBenét Ramsey dancing to the tune of Symphonie Fantastique.
Upvote
-2
(1
/
-3)
I have enough worries these days, why do you have to give me yet another, even creepier, worry?!
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Maybe I should start behaving like a complete as****** just to prevent myself from being turned into an AI bot. =\
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Or you fail upward and find yourself the CEO of the AI bot company
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
By this logic, all Wills are useless and assets have been getting distributed illegally for centuries
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
I am a lawyer who practices in the area of wills and estate planning, as well as estate administration, and I have some thoughts about this (not legal advice, just legal musings):
1. A will cannot be used to claw back rights which you may have granted during your lifetime, and it cannot bind people to do things they haven't consented to do, except in certain scenarios where a will requests someone take a particular action before receiving a benefit from the deceased's estate, and even then, there are significant limits on that kind of clause (generally, courts look unfavourably on testators trying to exert undue control over the living from beyond the grave). In particular there are public policy reasons why you can't make a gift contingent on your child not entering into a mixed race relationship, or separating from their current spouse, things like that.
2. Because a will cannot claw back rights which you may have granted nor bind parties that aren't related to your estate (beneficiaries, debtors, creditors, intestate successors, etc)., you could not use a will to, for example, compel Meta not to use information, photos, or video you've uploaded to Facebook, to train AI models, so long as the use of that data was in accordance with Meta's terms of service which you agreed to when you were using Facebook. A will that said "Meta may not use my data to train AI models" would be about as enforceable as those BS "Copyright Notices" people post as status updates on Facebook that say you're not granting Facebook / Meta any rights over the data or photos you share on social media (ie - legalese nonsense with absolutely no force or effect).
3. A will could include a clause attempting to prevent a beneficiary or relative from making an AI doppelganger after death. You can compel your beneficiaries to do, or not do, certain things with your assets after you die, and a clause that says "my beneficiaries may not use my photos, videos, or other digital assets to create an AI doppelganger" would be enforceable on its face. However, what happens if a child of the deceased decides to upload all of the deceased's digital assets to some AI doppelganger-generator contrary to the wishes of the deceased? Presumably another beneficiary could bring a claim against that person, but what are the damages? No one has actually been harmed by this behaviour in a way where you could attach a monetary penalty and say "this behaviour cost this person X dollars or harm equivalent to X dollars and the court awards damages thusly". Without amending legislation to create some kind of statutory penalty, I don't think this would be enforceable in practice, even if it's enforceable in theory.
1. A will cannot be used to claw back rights which you may have granted during your lifetime, and it cannot bind people to do things they haven't consented to do, except in certain scenarios where a will requests someone take a particular action before receiving a benefit from the deceased's estate, and even then, there are significant limits on that kind of clause (generally, courts look unfavourably on testators trying to exert undue control over the living from beyond the grave). In particular there are public policy reasons why you can't make a gift contingent on your child not entering into a mixed race relationship, or separating from their current spouse, things like that.
2. Because a will cannot claw back rights which you may have granted nor bind parties that aren't related to your estate (beneficiaries, debtors, creditors, intestate successors, etc)., you could not use a will to, for example, compel Meta not to use information, photos, or video you've uploaded to Facebook, to train AI models, so long as the use of that data was in accordance with Meta's terms of service which you agreed to when you were using Facebook. A will that said "Meta may not use my data to train AI models" would be about as enforceable as those BS "Copyright Notices" people post as status updates on Facebook that say you're not granting Facebook / Meta any rights over the data or photos you share on social media (ie - legalese nonsense with absolutely no force or effect).
3. A will could include a clause attempting to prevent a beneficiary or relative from making an AI doppelganger after death. You can compel your beneficiaries to do, or not do, certain things with your assets after you die, and a clause that says "my beneficiaries may not use my photos, videos, or other digital assets to create an AI doppelganger" would be enforceable on its face. However, what happens if a child of the deceased decides to upload all of the deceased's digital assets to some AI doppelganger-generator contrary to the wishes of the deceased? Presumably another beneficiary could bring a claim against that person, but what are the damages? No one has actually been harmed by this behaviour in a way where you could attach a monetary penalty and say "this behaviour cost this person X dollars or harm equivalent to X dollars and the court awards damages thusly". Without amending legislation to create some kind of statutory penalty, I don't think this would be enforceable in practice, even if it's enforceable in theory.
Upvote
22
(23
/
-1)
There are rules about how your assets are distributed after your death, but restricting how those assets are used by the new owners is pretty much impossible.
Upvote
-2
(1
/
-3)
Depends on the type of asset. Very difficult to tell people what they can do with direct cash gifts, but easily doable through the use of trusts.
Relatively easy to place restrictions on how people will use real estate even without the use of trusts, as well.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
How many years until grandma's chat and photo history becomes public domain? Photos and letters are regularly sold at estate sales, why not hard drive contents?
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
The OP suggested there are no rules becuase nothing affects the dead person.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Let's assume this takes off. Within a few decades, several members of my family will have passed away.
I noticed at our christmas parties that the different age groups tend to sit together. Grandparents with grandparents, kids with kids, adults with adults.
I guess a new group will be formed then. AI. A bunch of laptops sitting on a table talking to eachother.
Oh well...
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Sort of like all the AIs, including Poe, who got together after hours in Altered Carbon.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
I used to be a meatsack like you, before I took an arrow to the knee.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Honestly, once I'm dead, I literally won't be able to care, so not really concerned for me.
Though, I'd get mighty pissed off if someone made an AI clone of a dead relative of mine while I'm still living.
Though, I'd get mighty pissed off if someone made an AI clone of a dead relative of mine while I'm still living.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
…”
easily create digital replicas of lost loved ones, which can be generated without the knowledge or consent of the person who died.“
Not trying to be critical but shouldn’t the phrase be: without the knowledge or consent of living relatives?
easily create digital replicas of lost loved ones, which can be generated without the knowledge or consent of the person who died.“
Not trying to be critical but shouldn’t the phrase be: without the knowledge or consent of living relatives?
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
A Working Theory of Love by Scott Hutchins – review
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/feb/09/working-theory-love-hutchins-review?CMP=share_btn_url
From 2012.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/feb/09/working-theory-love-hutchins-review?CMP=share_btn_url
From 2012.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
For context, I work directly in the AI space (at a big cloud provider who rents lots of GPU time for all the models you know and love/loathe) on infrastructure stuff.
I genuinely don’t care if someone makes an AI out of me posthumously. Like, okay, if that’s good for you I’d be flattered, I’m sure, except I’m dead and thus beyond such trifling mortal concepts. Honestly the concern feels a little silly to me. Why do you care? You’re dead.
However, I lost my (very much beloved) mother in 2021, and at no point have I ever considered going through the process of making some Ai bot of her in memoriam. It would not be her, and I don’t think it would help me process my grief. The work of assembling it might be valuable for a different person in terms of reviewing their time together, and having an “interactive exhibit” to revisit those things, but it isn’t for me. It would very obviously not be her, and part of my grieving process has necessarily been dealing with the genuine loss of this person in my life who meant so much to me. She is singularly unique, and even a facsimile borne of “magic” future tech that replicated her synapses would simply not be the same entity. I think the folks using AI bots for grief will find that conclusion for themselves in the time that is right for them, or at least that’s what I would want for them. At the same time I don’t begrudge people who take a different journey that I am taking, as I cannot say what is right for another person.
I genuinely don’t care if someone makes an AI out of me posthumously. Like, okay, if that’s good for you I’d be flattered, I’m sure, except I’m dead and thus beyond such trifling mortal concepts. Honestly the concern feels a little silly to me. Why do you care? You’re dead.
However, I lost my (very much beloved) mother in 2021, and at no point have I ever considered going through the process of making some Ai bot of her in memoriam. It would not be her, and I don’t think it would help me process my grief. The work of assembling it might be valuable for a different person in terms of reviewing their time together, and having an “interactive exhibit” to revisit those things, but it isn’t for me. It would very obviously not be her, and part of my grieving process has necessarily been dealing with the genuine loss of this person in my life who meant so much to me. She is singularly unique, and even a facsimile borne of “magic” future tech that replicated her synapses would simply not be the same entity. I think the folks using AI bots for grief will find that conclusion for themselves in the time that is right for them, or at least that’s what I would want for them. At the same time I don’t begrudge people who take a different journey that I am taking, as I cannot say what is right for another person.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
As long as I remain dead (I’m looking at you, voodoo), I don’t care. Would I like someone profiting off an AI designed to be me? No. But, as a corpse my limbic system will no longer be capable of giving a shit.
I’ve been trying to make money as me for most of my life. I gotta let you up front, you’re gonna be disappointed.
I’ve been trying to make money as me for most of my life. I gotta let you up front, you’re gonna be disappointed.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Not an issue for me. Currently planning to live forever.
Its going pretty well so far, thinking itll work out.
Check back in 800 years ill update this post if its helpful.
Its going pretty well so far, thinking itll work out.
Check back in 800 years ill update this post if its helpful.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)