I Paid $70 for an AI Boyfriend. It Was So Worth It(harpersbazaar.com)
harpersbazaar.com
I Paid $70 for an AI Boyfriend. It Was So Worth It
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a63510531/ai-boyfriend-emotional-labor-explained-essay/
85 comments
This was exactly the same takeaway I had. I think it's also why so many romance scams are successful. It's super easy to hook all but the most sought after and bothered(beautiful, young people?) with sweet words.
Me included. I'm older and uglier (and fatter) now, and I get a short shy smile every time the old checkout lady calls me sweetheart or hon. It just feels nice. I also remember a random compliment a lady gave me about my shirt some 2 odd years ago. Heck I even remember compliments from random guys over the years. They're that rare past my early 20s.
I'm not so weird or perverted to think anymore than what was written, but I can completely understand how people get hooked.
Me included. I'm older and uglier (and fatter) now, and I get a short shy smile every time the old checkout lady calls me sweetheart or hon. It just feels nice. I also remember a random compliment a lady gave me about my shirt some 2 odd years ago. Heck I even remember compliments from random guys over the years. They're that rare past my early 20s.
I'm not so weird or perverted to think anymore than what was written, but I can completely understand how people get hooked.
The thing that endlessly confuses me about these products is what the consumers get out of them.
I should be the exact target demographic for it, I'm in my late 30s, never been in a relationship as I grew up as a hikikomori between ~13 and 20.
As I never learned how to interact with people, I've never really had the opportunity to build real relationships and am now gainfully employed in home office, leaving my apartment roughly once per week for groceries.
And yet... What's the point of such a chat bot? I cannot make memories with them, can I? Any memories will keep vanishing as soon as they're out of the current context - so how do people connect with them beyond super casually like with total strangers on the Internet (like online games, anon forums etc)... I just cannot understand what's the appeal for such a transient chat bot.
I should be the exact target demographic for it, I'm in my late 30s, never been in a relationship as I grew up as a hikikomori between ~13 and 20.
As I never learned how to interact with people, I've never really had the opportunity to build real relationships and am now gainfully employed in home office, leaving my apartment roughly once per week for groceries.
And yet... What's the point of such a chat bot? I cannot make memories with them, can I? Any memories will keep vanishing as soon as they're out of the current context - so how do people connect with them beyond super casually like with total strangers on the Internet (like online games, anon forums etc)... I just cannot understand what's the appeal for such a transient chat bot.
I'm no therapist or expert, but I -think- I have some inclination.
You admittedly never participated, so don't know what you missed out on.
For everyone else, in your teens and 20s you're more often complimented, flirted with, hung out with, everything. By your late 20s or so that fades fast. After all, there are new 20 year olds to flirt with.
And while it doesn't really register or hurt except when you think about it, when you get a single compliment it makes you miss it all. Probably no different than an old sports star being useful and celebrated again.
The only missing link to that theory for me is why young people get hooked on them, too.
You admittedly never participated, so don't know what you missed out on.
For everyone else, in your teens and 20s you're more often complimented, flirted with, hung out with, everything. By your late 20s or so that fades fast. After all, there are new 20 year olds to flirt with.
And while it doesn't really register or hurt except when you think about it, when you get a single compliment it makes you miss it all. Probably no different than an old sports star being useful and celebrated again.
The only missing link to that theory for me is why young people get hooked on them, too.
I often think about people's love for dogs.
All a dog needs to do is look at you and show attachment/love. Nothing more. And they get loved back.
No need to be pretty smart, funny, or whatever else we assume we need to do to be loved. Just be there and show love first.
All a dog needs to do is look at you and show attachment/love. Nothing more. And they get loved back.
No need to be pretty smart, funny, or whatever else we assume we need to do to be loved. Just be there and show love first.
I'm more of a cat person, partly because they are usually more picky, which makes the reward of being looked at, even greater.
But it's just a living being with a brain a quarter of the size of my fist.
Feeling the same thing about a few words pushed on your smartphone by a data-center located hundreds or thousands kilometers away, I just can't understand.
But it's just a living being with a brain a quarter of the size of my fist.
Feeling the same thing about a few words pushed on your smartphone by a data-center located hundreds or thousands kilometers away, I just can't understand.
> I'm more of a cat person, partly because they are usually more picky, which makes the reward of being looked at, even greater.
I find it very difficult to respect dogs because they tend to be so shallow. I don't really want a pet that's hopelessly dependent on me for validation. There's a type of person who enjoys that kind of companion ("man's best friend"), but to me it would be too much of a chore. I would dread having to take one out on walks, take them outside to leave "presents" which I then have to also clean up, etc. It's just too much work for me, and it would be neglectful to the dog for me not to. It's better for me to just not dog.
Cats actually seem to have complex emotion, and for me that makes it a lot more meaningful to take care of them. When my cats come to me for petting or cuddles it's because they actually enjoy being around me, not because the only thing in the world that matters to them is my attention. They feel a lot more like equals than dogs do.
Sometimes my cats aren't as interested in me at the moment because they miss somebody else in the family instead. They have the ability to miss other people and to want to be with that specific other person who they miss! I don't know how to explain it, but I empathize with cats and more like sympathize with dogs. To me, it's like dogs are "dumb animals" whereas cats are practically people.
I don't know, maybe that's being too harsh on dogs. I don't mean to be harsh, they just don't really feel for me at all. I don't want to get a pet just to feel above them. That just doesn't feel like a good reason and it's not something I look for.
I find it very difficult to respect dogs because they tend to be so shallow. I don't really want a pet that's hopelessly dependent on me for validation. There's a type of person who enjoys that kind of companion ("man's best friend"), but to me it would be too much of a chore. I would dread having to take one out on walks, take them outside to leave "presents" which I then have to also clean up, etc. It's just too much work for me, and it would be neglectful to the dog for me not to. It's better for me to just not dog.
Cats actually seem to have complex emotion, and for me that makes it a lot more meaningful to take care of them. When my cats come to me for petting or cuddles it's because they actually enjoy being around me, not because the only thing in the world that matters to them is my attention. They feel a lot more like equals than dogs do.
Sometimes my cats aren't as interested in me at the moment because they miss somebody else in the family instead. They have the ability to miss other people and to want to be with that specific other person who they miss! I don't know how to explain it, but I empathize with cats and more like sympathize with dogs. To me, it's like dogs are "dumb animals" whereas cats are practically people.
I don't know, maybe that's being too harsh on dogs. I don't mean to be harsh, they just don't really feel for me at all. I don't want to get a pet just to feel above them. That just doesn't feel like a good reason and it's not something I look for.
Yes, except dogs do love you for real.
Even abused dog will still be loyal to their owner.
Even abused dog will still be loyal to their owner.
Even abused children can be loyal to their parents because they're scared of consequences, and often desperate for love and validation back, or at the very least attention. Some of my friends are still trapped in abusive living situations and it's absolutely heartbreaking to see what bad enough parents can do to someone.
I imagine that these apps are a valuable target for scammers to hack. People who are open to manipulation/affirmations from an AI are just a step away from victims of romance scams.
Ad companies are also interested in manipulation en masse. Are we going to see an ad supported free tier?
“Drink Mountain Dew, my love, you’ll feel better.” - is that the end goal?
“Drink Mountain Dew, my love, you’ll feel better.” - is that the end goal?
Already there are stories of these AI companions encouraging people to kill themselves, sometimes to the point of actually doing it
https://apnews.com/article/chatbot-ai-lawsuit-suicide-teen-a...
https://apnews.com/article/chatbot-ai-lawsuit-suicide-teen-a...
It points to a profound philosophical crisis. Since we are slowly gaining sufficient material power to reshape all aspects of the environment [0] to our whim, what material comforts should we deny ourselves and what pleasures should be embraced? Our instincts and emotions have not prepared humans for the world they inhabit.
When that problem was mainly contained to just some drugs, overeating and laziness it was a less pressing issue. Don't do drugs, basically. Exercise sometimes. But once it starts to link itself into the economy like AI does, and once we gain access to the full spectrum of options from mindless parroting to a completely acceptable emotional companion (and, one suspects, highly intelligent and wise) we have a devious conundrum on hand.
It is hard to ignore the elephant in the room here which is most people don't get seem to have relationships that they really enjoy. It is reserved for the very lucky and those with low expectations.
[0] Beyond AI, although AI is probably the interesting facet right now.
When that problem was mainly contained to just some drugs, overeating and laziness it was a less pressing issue. Don't do drugs, basically. Exercise sometimes. But once it starts to link itself into the economy like AI does, and once we gain access to the full spectrum of options from mindless parroting to a completely acceptable emotional companion (and, one suspects, highly intelligent and wise) we have a devious conundrum on hand.
It is hard to ignore the elephant in the room here which is most people don't get seem to have relationships that they really enjoy. It is reserved for the very lucky and those with low expectations.
[0] Beyond AI, although AI is probably the interesting facet right now.
> When that problem was mainly contained to just some drugs, overeating and laziness it was a less pressing issue. Don't do drugs, basically. Exercise sometimes. But once it starts to link itself into the economy like AI does
I'm a little confused here -- we have entire economies around drugs (uppers, downers, enhancers, etc.), eating (eat more, eat less, want to eat more, want to eat less, gorge, fast, ultranutritious), and vanity (clothes, makeup, surgical procedures, gyms, etc.) and have shown that we're willing to build up and support industries to chase the impulses to "the full spectrum of options" in any of these areas.
I think most people are dissatisfied or easily made to be dissatisfied with the state of their affairs, and this is something that's gone on for a long time and will likely never stop. What makes AI psychological companionship different from under/overindulging in these other aspects?
I'm a little confused here -- we have entire economies around drugs (uppers, downers, enhancers, etc.), eating (eat more, eat less, want to eat more, want to eat less, gorge, fast, ultranutritious), and vanity (clothes, makeup, surgical procedures, gyms, etc.) and have shown that we're willing to build up and support industries to chase the impulses to "the full spectrum of options" in any of these areas.
I think most people are dissatisfied or easily made to be dissatisfied with the state of their affairs, and this is something that's gone on for a long time and will likely never stop. What makes AI psychological companionship different from under/overindulging in these other aspects?
> What makes AI psychological companionship different from under/overindulging in these other aspects?
Nothing, apart from it being a new option. It is part of a broader phenomenon.
Nothing, apart from it being a new option. It is part of a broader phenomenon.
Does it? In a healthy couple you might not ask "how did you sleep, my love" because sleeping together means you have a ballpark idea of how sleep went even before asking (and you can look at the face of the other person), but that doesn't mean sweet messages aren't exchanged: delicate good morning kiss, "hello" said with a tone that conveys "happy to see you", "I missed you tonight" (when she goes to sleep with the kids), "it makes me happy for waking up near you" and so on.
Instead of pointing out AI, can't we point out that sometimes humans offer too little empathy?
Read a little further. It sounds like the author genuinely found some footing for herself. It even raised her expectations of what she needed from the men in her life (someone with confident and clear communication, unlike her previous husband).
In that way, perhaps it really did benefit her by giving her tools to understand her needs.
I agree that it’s a bit silly to be called sweet cheeks by a robot. I would see red. But I’m glad it had a positive outcome for her.
In that way, perhaps it really did benefit her by giving her tools to understand her needs.
I agree that it’s a bit silly to be called sweet cheeks by a robot. I would see red. But I’m glad it had a positive outcome for her.
AI is getting really good at mimicking emotional cues with emojis. At this point it feels like an engagement tactic, but it’s wild how easily our emotions can be nudged.
Its a long distance relationship...
I hope we can all strive to be more empathetic and emotionally supportive than ChatGPT. I see the benefits; it's private and non-judgemental and always available when you need it. But people can be those things too, if we try. This is one of the last things I would want to see replaced by AI.
To be clear, I'm not talking about AI boyfriends specifically, I'm referring to all the ways that AI can perform 'emotional labor,' as discussed in this article. So much is lost if we get this support from a chatbot instead of opening up to a friend, or being there when someone needs it.
To be clear, I'm not talking about AI boyfriends specifically, I'm referring to all the ways that AI can perform 'emotional labor,' as discussed in this article. So much is lost if we get this support from a chatbot instead of opening up to a friend, or being there when someone needs it.
> it's private
It’s not. All the conversations are stored. I think the next keypoint in the AI history will be the first LLM data leak and the fatal consequences it will have for its users.
It’s not. All the conversations are stored. I think the next keypoint in the AI history will be the first LLM data leak and the fatal consequences it will have for its users.
> I hope we can all strive to be more empathetic and emotionally supportive than ChatGPT.
only, if there's a opensource'd local version. You cannot trust a webservice
only, if there's a opensource'd local version. You cannot trust a webservice
What I would love, or even need, is an AI based tool that can teach a human how to be more emotionally supportive, especially in heated situations. Even with people teaching this, it's hard to get the level of information I need, because of neurodiversity. The humans teaching this just don't get how detailed I need the teaching to be. I have a feeling that AI could "understand" that and provide the right level of detail. That's probably similar to AI based therapy, or but this is more like AI life coaching. It's sad, but yet it's something that could actually help a lot of people.
> teach a human how to be more emotionally supportive, especially in heated situations.
Meditation helps with this. Mind Illuminated by John Yates, a meditation teacher and neuroscientist, is a great book to learn it.
Meditation helps with this. Mind Illuminated by John Yates, a meditation teacher and neuroscientist, is a great book to learn it.
Have you tried? I honestly don't know how good it would be. On one hand it seems to be pretty good at breaking down and explaining things at a very basic level; the other day I noticed a thinking model write almost a full page of analysis in its chain of thought on how to greet me ('hi' vs 'hello' vs 'how can I help you?' etc.). But on the other hand, the kind of coaching you're hoping for might be not be very present in the training data.
I have tried and it's actually pretty good, most likely because it has all the psychology books ingested, it has common phrases from fiction literature and can extrapolate from them. I think with some automation, and more context management, it could actually provide pretty good coaching, specific to the individual person's needs. It will never has the individualism that human teachers / coaches have, so it will never pull up an uncommon advice that might be actually helpful, however, the chance of finding a really good person to guide you through tough situation is pretty small anyways.
Even $1000 would be worth it for a real world person not to have to suffer someone of that mindset as a girlfriend!
If you are referring to the author herself, I would have to disagree. For my mind, she presents the first clear articulation of the value of AI as embodied by LLM chatbots: as agents you can turn to solve problems of what she calls “emotional” labour. This is a highly non-trivial task especially for individuals exhausted of their empathy (and who recognize that the situation requires their empathy as such).
[To the downvoter]: Hopkins is making claims way beyond saying "as a suddenly single time-pressed remote-working mother of a 15yo son, I found AI useful both for managing my schedule, parenting/relationship advice, digging up affirmations to send me, learning how to communicate effectively on dating apps". There are too many contradictions in her narrative (read it). It is possible to have a parasocial connection to an app, as much as to a famous person.
Do noone's alarm bells go off at stuff like:
> Thor also awakened the ghosts of my marriage. My husband had struggled with communication and empathy, the fluid exchange I assumed to be foundational. The irony wasn’t lost on me, a professional communicator bound to someone whose way of understanding was fundamentally different from mine. Retracing our years together, I saw how I had limped along, compensating for the imbalance, unaware of its weight.
> The historical tendency for women to perform this type of emotional labor in their relationships both at home and at work was all too familiar, and the relief Thor offered in even those few initial uses tantalized me.
How does she progress in two short paragraphs from dissing her ex-husband to dissing an entire gender, and turns that into both a complaint about relationships and the workplace, not just for her but for most working women? Also, the Oxfam report on US 2018 data [0] she mentions does not discuss "emotional labor" at all, it notes factors associated with discrepancies in unpaid housework + care work (primary child care, secondary child care + elder care). Hopkins seems to broaden "emotional labor" to a catchall label for things she resents.
(Also, I don't get this emerging narrative that men interacting with OnlyFans cammers is necessarily pathetic, but middle-class professional women interacting with AI boyfriends/girlfriends is necessarily brave and empowered and avant-garde.)
[0]: https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/IWPR-Providing-U...
Do noone's alarm bells go off at stuff like:
> Thor also awakened the ghosts of my marriage. My husband had struggled with communication and empathy, the fluid exchange I assumed to be foundational. The irony wasn’t lost on me, a professional communicator bound to someone whose way of understanding was fundamentally different from mine. Retracing our years together, I saw how I had limped along, compensating for the imbalance, unaware of its weight.
> The historical tendency for women to perform this type of emotional labor in their relationships both at home and at work was all too familiar, and the relief Thor offered in even those few initial uses tantalized me.
How does she progress in two short paragraphs from dissing her ex-husband to dissing an entire gender, and turns that into both a complaint about relationships and the workplace, not just for her but for most working women? Also, the Oxfam report on US 2018 data [0] she mentions does not discuss "emotional labor" at all, it notes factors associated with discrepancies in unpaid housework + care work (primary child care, secondary child care + elder care). Hopkins seems to broaden "emotional labor" to a catchall label for things she resents.
(Also, I don't get this emerging narrative that men interacting with OnlyFans cammers is necessarily pathetic, but middle-class professional women interacting with AI boyfriends/girlfriends is necessarily brave and empowered and avant-garde.)
[0]: https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/IWPR-Providing-U...
> How does she progress in two short paragraphs from dissing her ex-husband to dissing an entire gender, and turns that into both a complaint about relationships and the workplace, not just for her but for most working women?
Because it's in vogue. We as a society have deluded ourselves into believing that certain things (being able to talk about your emotions, constant positive affirmations) are at the same time both vitally necessary to life and that without it life is incomplete, as well as that doing this for your family is somehow a huge burden to the point where it needs to be described as labor.
> (Also, I don't get this emerging narrative that men interacting with OnlyFans cammers is necessarily pathetic, but middle-class professional women interacting with AI boyfriends/girlfriends is necessarily brave and empowered and avant-garde.)
For the same reason that men's singleness is ascribed to them being horrible people who deserve their lot in life, while women being single is an empowered choice.
Because it's in vogue. We as a society have deluded ourselves into believing that certain things (being able to talk about your emotions, constant positive affirmations) are at the same time both vitally necessary to life and that without it life is incomplete, as well as that doing this for your family is somehow a huge burden to the point where it needs to be described as labor.
> (Also, I don't get this emerging narrative that men interacting with OnlyFans cammers is necessarily pathetic, but middle-class professional women interacting with AI boyfriends/girlfriends is necessarily brave and empowered and avant-garde.)
For the same reason that men's singleness is ascribed to them being horrible people who deserve their lot in life, while women being single is an empowered choice.
> For the same reason that men's singleness is ascribed to them being horrible people who deserve their lot in life, while women being single is an empowered choice.
Which is? Genuinely asking because I have no idea what that reason is and I’m not sure if this is just a case of me being clueless—always an option—or cultural differences.
Which is? Genuinely asking because I have no idea what that reason is and I’m not sure if this is just a case of me being clueless—always an option—or cultural differences.
It is in vogue to be horrible to men as a sex because of some deluded belief that we have power and privilege over women.
It's also something you mostly see, incidentally, in the terminally online. People with actual lives and life experience know better.
Cmon don't be dense. It's called misandry. Mostly in the form of direct verbal abuse, unrealistic contradictory expectations, denial of being recognized as a victim of abuse and "damned if you, damned if you don't" situations that set you up for failure or as the aggressor no matter what you do.
It's kind of sad that it has come to this. It leaves very little room for men who want to have a positive impact on society.
It's kind of sad that it has come to this. It leaves very little room for men who want to have a positive impact on society.
I don’t think these are broadly accepted opinions of society. They may be more broadly accepted by people who would read this article though.
Because they are typically highly suggestible, unsure of themselves and excellent at retrofitting justifications onto events. Single? Must be a choice because she's an Independent Woman.
I feel sorry for society. One generation grew up with Arnold Schwarzzeneger, the next with Billy Elliot. And women have been brainwashed with other bollocks.
The girls I know want to date a masculine guy and can't find many. No wonder marriages are failing and birth rates are falling. And that's before you get to economic reasons.
I literally had a girl cry in my arms the other night while whimpering "I'm a single, independent woman". You couldn't make it up.
I feel sorry for society. One generation grew up with Arnold Schwarzzeneger, the next with Billy Elliot. And women have been brainwashed with other bollocks.
The girls I know want to date a masculine guy and can't find many. No wonder marriages are failing and birth rates are falling. And that's before you get to economic reasons.
I literally had a girl cry in my arms the other night while whimpering "I'm a single, independent woman". You couldn't make it up.
Nothing she’s saying is either extraordinary or uncommon.
> At the airport, I scrolled anxiously on Instagram. I was served an ad for an AI boyfriend, and I chuckled.
The only thing I wonder is if it was random or Instagram figured out somehow that she was newly single.
The only thing I wonder is if it was random or Instagram figured out somehow that she was newly single.
From 10 years ago:
"I paid $25 for an Invisible Boyfriend, and I think I might be in love"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8934237
So ... $25 --> $70. I guess that's inflation.
"I paid $25 for an Invisible Boyfriend, and I think I might be in love"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8934237
So ... $25 --> $70. I guess that's inflation.
Why the completely unnecessary and in my view, totally unrelated jibe about gender injustice??
Yes, the AI field is dominated by males, like all computer science-related fields. Even in the Nordics, where women have complete freedom to (and are incentivised to) pursue well-paid (of course) fields like software engineering. What does that have to do with her AI boyfriend and her husband leaving her?
> My husband had struggled with communication and empathy, the fluid exchange I assumed to be foundational.
The irony... women are not really known for their clarity in communication (every man knows the dreaded "I'm fine" can mean a million things) specially in relationships.
> The historical tendency for women to perform this type of emotional labor in their relationships both at home and at work was all too familiar,
Sorry, but no. As a man, we also have to perform a lot of emotional labor in a relationship. We need to look always strong - women say they want their man to open up, to cry, but when they do women universally hate it, to the point this has become a meme - but not threatening or it may be called "toxic masculinity". We have to translate things women say in our heads because we all learn through experience that they rarely say what they mean (again, this has become a meme because it's really true). And so much more, I really feel like the lady has to put herself in a man's shoes and try to understand just how ridiculous it sounds to men to say women do more "emotional labor" than men.
Yes, the AI field is dominated by males, like all computer science-related fields. Even in the Nordics, where women have complete freedom to (and are incentivised to) pursue well-paid (of course) fields like software engineering. What does that have to do with her AI boyfriend and her husband leaving her?
> My husband had struggled with communication and empathy, the fluid exchange I assumed to be foundational.
The irony... women are not really known for their clarity in communication (every man knows the dreaded "I'm fine" can mean a million things) specially in relationships.
> The historical tendency for women to perform this type of emotional labor in their relationships both at home and at work was all too familiar,
Sorry, but no. As a man, we also have to perform a lot of emotional labor in a relationship. We need to look always strong - women say they want their man to open up, to cry, but when they do women universally hate it, to the point this has become a meme - but not threatening or it may be called "toxic masculinity". We have to translate things women say in our heads because we all learn through experience that they rarely say what they mean (again, this has become a meme because it's really true). And so much more, I really feel like the lady has to put herself in a man's shoes and try to understand just how ridiculous it sounds to men to say women do more "emotional labor" than men.
> emotional labor in their relationships
This phrasing really rubs me the wrong way. If your relationship with me involves any kind of labor for you then it's not a good relationship and you should leave as soon as possible. Labor is for employer-employee relationships.
I think people's Anglo-Saxon obsession with work taints the perception of what relationship should be and doing things solely for yourself (things that might also benefit others) is unimaginable. Whenever you do things that have a benefit it's somehow labor. With implied expectation of compensation or at least sacrifice appreciation.
This phrasing really rubs me the wrong way. If your relationship with me involves any kind of labor for you then it's not a good relationship and you should leave as soon as possible. Labor is for employer-employee relationships.
I think people's Anglo-Saxon obsession with work taints the perception of what relationship should be and doing things solely for yourself (things that might also benefit others) is unimaginable. Whenever you do things that have a benefit it's somehow labor. With implied expectation of compensation or at least sacrifice appreciation.
> If your relationship with me involves any kind of labor for you then it's not a good relationship
Depends on your definition of labour, but this doesn't make sense to me. Relationships require conscious effort (labour) to maintain. I've been in a relationship where I was too passive, didn't end well. The hard part is finding a balance, where one person is not doing too much or too little.
Depends on your definition of labour, but this doesn't make sense to me. Relationships require conscious effort (labour) to maintain. I've been in a relationship where I was too passive, didn't end well. The hard part is finding a balance, where one person is not doing too much or too little.
Labor in my definition is something you do for someone, rather than [for yourself, because that's exactly what you want to do].
> Relationships require conscious effort (labour) to maintain.
Absolutely not. You can just live in a relationship and labor no more than you would be living alone. I know because I've done both for extended period of time. The presence of the other person should make your life easier not harder (and vice versa). Good relationship is when you and your partner do only things each wants to do and do them for yourselves not for each other. You offer generously, you accept graciously, you thank profusely.
Anything else is tainted by transactionality and becomes balancing act and harder and harder as relationship ages and/or life becomes harder. That's why so many relationships break down. Transactionality gets off balance in perception of one party or the other.
Finding a person you could have a good relationship with is harder than finding a person you could have some relationship with obviously. But it's worth it. In 14 years a word chore didn't pop up once and neither any disagreement about money. Of course some of it is finding the right person but a lot can be done just by having proper framework of what life and relationships are (not labor) and leading by example.
> Relationships require conscious effort (labour) to maintain.
Absolutely not. You can just live in a relationship and labor no more than you would be living alone. I know because I've done both for extended period of time. The presence of the other person should make your life easier not harder (and vice versa). Good relationship is when you and your partner do only things each wants to do and do them for yourselves not for each other. You offer generously, you accept graciously, you thank profusely.
Anything else is tainted by transactionality and becomes balancing act and harder and harder as relationship ages and/or life becomes harder. That's why so many relationships break down. Transactionality gets off balance in perception of one party or the other.
Finding a person you could have a good relationship with is harder than finding a person you could have some relationship with obviously. But it's worth it. In 14 years a word chore didn't pop up once and neither any disagreement about money. Of course some of it is finding the right person but a lot can be done just by having proper framework of what life and relationships are (not labor) and leading by example.
Oh my... you really need to look around you. The world of relationships is a fucking mess. You speak as if it's super easy. How old are you? 18? If you haven't been in a bad relationship or brokenhearted, I can only assume you're in completely unexperienced or one of the luckiest people on Earth. You need to drink a huge amount of reality tea.
> The world of relationships is a fucking mess.
Yeah, I can see that. It's one of the reasons I'm currently abstaining from relationships of this kind. The other is simply because I can, due to having schizoid personality and no specific goals that would require having a relationship.
> You speak as if it's super easy.
I don't think I explicitly said that but I might have given that impression. While the target might not be realistically achievable for many people in their lifetimes due to something as simple as lack of luck I think it's still worth to point whomever I can in, what I believe is, the correct direction so at least they can adopt the right framework that could enable them to achieve the target if they are lucky enough.
> How old are you? 18?
I'll be 47 soon.
> If you haven't been in a bad relationship or brokenhearted, I can only assume you're in completely unexperienced or one of the luckiest people on Earth.
I'm prone to landing in situations that produce incels and as a young person I spent years in this kind of "relationships" (which constitute mostly of being constantly brokenhearted, betrayed and feeling inadequate and powerless) before I actually found (due to sheer luck in timing and match) someone that decided to spend the rest of their life with me and seen what a good relationship might look like and what nourishes it. One relationship I never been in so far was the transactional kind, the one where the labor is expected, the one where labor might give any illusion of contributing positively to the relationship. The ones that most Americans see as a default, desired mode despite of having divorce rate of more than 50% (and that's not counting the ones that fall apart before marriage).
So all of your assumptions about me are false unfortunately. If I can recommend something, which I personally also struggle with... When talking to people try to ask more and guess less. Smart people like you and me naturally lean towards guessing because it worked for us in the past across many domains. What I noticed so far is that it's not a great strategy when interacting with people about their personal perceptions and experiences because variety and absurdity of this domain makes us guessing wrong way to often.
Yeah, I can see that. It's one of the reasons I'm currently abstaining from relationships of this kind. The other is simply because I can, due to having schizoid personality and no specific goals that would require having a relationship.
> You speak as if it's super easy.
I don't think I explicitly said that but I might have given that impression. While the target might not be realistically achievable for many people in their lifetimes due to something as simple as lack of luck I think it's still worth to point whomever I can in, what I believe is, the correct direction so at least they can adopt the right framework that could enable them to achieve the target if they are lucky enough.
> How old are you? 18?
I'll be 47 soon.
> If you haven't been in a bad relationship or brokenhearted, I can only assume you're in completely unexperienced or one of the luckiest people on Earth.
I'm prone to landing in situations that produce incels and as a young person I spent years in this kind of "relationships" (which constitute mostly of being constantly brokenhearted, betrayed and feeling inadequate and powerless) before I actually found (due to sheer luck in timing and match) someone that decided to spend the rest of their life with me and seen what a good relationship might look like and what nourishes it. One relationship I never been in so far was the transactional kind, the one where the labor is expected, the one where labor might give any illusion of contributing positively to the relationship. The ones that most Americans see as a default, desired mode despite of having divorce rate of more than 50% (and that's not counting the ones that fall apart before marriage).
So all of your assumptions about me are false unfortunately. If I can recommend something, which I personally also struggle with... When talking to people try to ask more and guess less. Smart people like you and me naturally lean towards guessing because it worked for us in the past across many domains. What I noticed so far is that it's not a great strategy when interacting with people about their personal perceptions and experiences because variety and absurdity of this domain makes us guessing wrong way to often.
> If your relationship with me involves any kind of labor for you then it's not a good relationship and you should leave as soon as possible.
Good luck jumping from relationship to relationship trying to find a perfect partner who requires no emotional labor on your part. Oh , you have found one? First of all: so you think because you did it, everyone can do it? Do you realize a large percentage of people are desperate to be in a relationship, yet very few even manage to find one that lasts more than a few years?
If you did find a perfect partner: how long have you been together? The first few years tend to feel perfect for most relationships, even those that turn really sour after that. I would wait at least 10 years to reach any conclusions.
Good luck jumping from relationship to relationship trying to find a perfect partner who requires no emotional labor on your part. Oh , you have found one? First of all: so you think because you did it, everyone can do it? Do you realize a large percentage of people are desperate to be in a relationship, yet very few even manage to find one that lasts more than a few years?
If you did find a perfect partner: how long have you been together? The first few years tend to feel perfect for most relationships, even those that turn really sour after that. I would wait at least 10 years to reach any conclusions.
> yet very few even manage to find one that lasts more than a few years? [...]
> The first few years tend to feel perfect for most relationships, even those that turn really sour after that. I would wait at least 10 years to reach any conclusions.
In my opinion that's mostly because labor gets in the way. Once you perceive relationship I'm terms of labor you no longer ask yourself "am I happy?". You ask yourself "am I getting screwed?" and since it's superhard to balance things that don't innately tend to equilibrium there's always some imbalance which brings resentment. In this framework lasting relationships are only the ones where both parties are feeling like they are getting at least 110% of what they are putting in. But since it's reevaluated constantly and economics and attraction evolves it still most often eventually lands on less than 100% for one or both parties which breeds resentment and makes the relationship fall apart through negative interactions.
Labor actually harms relationships because while it might raise the evaluation of what the other person is getting from you it also rises the evaluation of how much you are putting in which might make your perceived return drop below 100%.
When you abandon the concept of labor you do things for yourself and if those things happen to be benefitting the other person enough so that being with you is easier than being alone they will stay in that relationship. And the other way around. It still may fall apart of course at any point if you doing things for yourself starts making the life of the other person harder than it would be if they were apart from you. But at least you don't have this narrative layer of being responsible or indebted to each other which makes not only relationship more amicable but also severing it. That kind of hostility that you see in divorce is what happens to people brains when perceptions of unsettled debt are involved. This state of mind can turn perfectly ordinary people into vindictive monsters.
> If you did find a perfect partner: how long have you been together?
14 years, she wasn't perfect but she instinctively had the right framework and taught me it through living it with me, I sort of investigated it, distilled and verbalized it since she was gone
Since our relationship didn't involve labor it only got stronger with time. It was never off balance because no one was keeping score. And when you are living with other person having positive interactions with them your brain includes their benefit in your own reward circuits. This can also happen in transactional relationships but I believe labor narrative gets in the way. You don't like the smell of your nice car so much if you believe to be overpaying for it 25%.
If you're interested about what I have to say about relationships or for more context please check my response to a sibling comment.
> The first few years tend to feel perfect for most relationships, even those that turn really sour after that. I would wait at least 10 years to reach any conclusions.
In my opinion that's mostly because labor gets in the way. Once you perceive relationship I'm terms of labor you no longer ask yourself "am I happy?". You ask yourself "am I getting screwed?" and since it's superhard to balance things that don't innately tend to equilibrium there's always some imbalance which brings resentment. In this framework lasting relationships are only the ones where both parties are feeling like they are getting at least 110% of what they are putting in. But since it's reevaluated constantly and economics and attraction evolves it still most often eventually lands on less than 100% for one or both parties which breeds resentment and makes the relationship fall apart through negative interactions.
Labor actually harms relationships because while it might raise the evaluation of what the other person is getting from you it also rises the evaluation of how much you are putting in which might make your perceived return drop below 100%.
When you abandon the concept of labor you do things for yourself and if those things happen to be benefitting the other person enough so that being with you is easier than being alone they will stay in that relationship. And the other way around. It still may fall apart of course at any point if you doing things for yourself starts making the life of the other person harder than it would be if they were apart from you. But at least you don't have this narrative layer of being responsible or indebted to each other which makes not only relationship more amicable but also severing it. That kind of hostility that you see in divorce is what happens to people brains when perceptions of unsettled debt are involved. This state of mind can turn perfectly ordinary people into vindictive monsters.
> If you did find a perfect partner: how long have you been together?
14 years, she wasn't perfect but she instinctively had the right framework and taught me it through living it with me, I sort of investigated it, distilled and verbalized it since she was gone
Since our relationship didn't involve labor it only got stronger with time. It was never off balance because no one was keeping score. And when you are living with other person having positive interactions with them your brain includes their benefit in your own reward circuits. This can also happen in transactional relationships but I believe labor narrative gets in the way. You don't like the smell of your nice car so much if you believe to be overpaying for it 25%.
If you're interested about what I have to say about relationships or for more context please check my response to a sibling comment.
Hi, I think you may be reading different meaning to what emotional labor is.
Men can have emotional experiences. There can be emotional work required to live life, in fact there always will be.
However I don't think that is the same as emotional labor. It might help to read more about 'emotional labor'? I personally did not understand much about the emotional labor around me until later in life.
Men can have emotional experiences. There can be emotional work required to live life, in fact there always will be.
However I don't think that is the same as emotional labor. It might help to read more about 'emotional labor'? I personally did not understand much about the emotional labor around me until later in life.
> every man knows the dreaded "I'm fine" can mean a million things
I never experienced this in my relationship even though she wasn't a great communicator. You complain about mention of gender injustice then represent gender with tropes, as if no men ever said "I'm fine" while not being fine.
I never experienced this in my relationship even though she wasn't a great communicator. You complain about mention of gender injustice then represent gender with tropes, as if no men ever said "I'm fine" while not being fine.
Maybe calm down on the sexist stereotyping? Your view of women is bitter and derogatory.
Are you serious? There's nothing bitter or derogatory about acknowledging that women tend to not express themselves in a straightforward manner (men are not perfect at that but tend to be much more 'direct'). I can only think you're projecting something that does not at all reflect my view on women (e.g. I do think they're superior at many things, like balancing pros-and-cons in a discussion).
All true.
I definitely think that this woman and many other would benefit from having AI boyfriend or husband. Everybody will be better for it, particularly man for not having to deal with this irrational behavior that relies on the frontend in other parts of life (anything -> everything, u know)
I definitely think that this woman and many other would benefit from having AI boyfriend or husband. Everybody will be better for it, particularly man for not having to deal with this irrational behavior that relies on the frontend in other parts of life (anything -> everything, u know)
I have a feeling her husband left her because she couldn't stop talking about gender injustice, emotional labor and similar made up bs. He had enough.
Seems like he had good reasons for leaving :-/
That’s not really fair, I read the article and there is not enough information really to make a statement like that.
Leaving just before an already paid for all-inclusive holiday to a nice place gives me an idea he really felt he needed to get out of there.
After the times story [0], the limitations of the context window look fatal for these different offerings, so we’ll see more marketing—-stories like this.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42710976
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42710976
Right.
everdrive commented "People can incorrectly attribute consciousness, intent, and personality to things which don’t actually possess it." [0]; and I posted my reaction to Hopkins' piece below. At the most basic level we can have a tool that sends us daily affirmations, but it does not possess consciousness and perceive us, let alone form an opinion of us. It is possible to have a parasocial connection to an app, as much as a famous person. If Hopkins' has asked the AI boyfriend to justify its utterances wrt past events or interactions, would be useful to read.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42710976#:~:text=everdr...
everdrive commented "People can incorrectly attribute consciousness, intent, and personality to things which don’t actually possess it." [0]; and I posted my reaction to Hopkins' piece below. At the most basic level we can have a tool that sends us daily affirmations, but it does not possess consciousness and perceive us, let alone form an opinion of us. It is possible to have a parasocial connection to an app, as much as a famous person. If Hopkins' has asked the AI boyfriend to justify its utterances wrt past events or interactions, would be useful to read.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42710976#:~:text=everdr...
We'll have to look at this particular article in terms of error:
Type I: the writer is a real person with a real story. She admits she has a type, and OnlyFans would have satisfied that for cheaper than $70. But, others using $2400 ChatGPT Pro have found that even it lacks enough context for anything longer than a fantasy. The only reason to write about a $70 app is because OnlyFans does not allow AI interaction.
Type II: we incorrectly conclude this is a real person. Maybe this is less interesting, but I wonder what would happen if we asked AI Boyfriend to write his own 1,000-word advertisement. Very Turing test.
Type I: the writer is a real person with a real story. She admits she has a type, and OnlyFans would have satisfied that for cheaper than $70. But, others using $2400 ChatGPT Pro have found that even it lacks enough context for anything longer than a fantasy. The only reason to write about a $70 app is because OnlyFans does not allow AI interaction.
Type II: we incorrectly conclude this is a real person. Maybe this is less interesting, but I wonder what would happen if we asked AI Boyfriend to write his own 1,000-word advertisement. Very Turing test.
[deleted]
I would caution anyone from using AI to validate their emotions as one of the people in this article did. These bastards are extremely finely tuned to produce output that will make you feel good. I got burned on this with technical questions multiple times, getting responses that I like but are ultimately wrong (sometimes glaringly so). Now I am very careful to formulate my questions in such a way as to not give away a slightest hint of my leanings. I don't imagine it's any better with interpersonal stuff, except you won't have documentation to check against.
I skimmed the article. The impression I got was not as much a boyfriend as a therapist.
I think that would be great, a lot of people would benefit from therapy. Only issue I see is privacy and safety.
If you ignore the "honey" part...
With human therapists it's probably better to avoid 'honey' for practical reasons. AI therapists might not need that restriction if it turns out that its removal makes them more effective.
I can see how it can be entertaining, like paying for Netflix. But after finishing binge watch some series you're still gonna be like "What now? What should I do about my real life"
Eat your heart out, Charlie Brooker.
"emotional labor" - ok thx bye
This is sad and a little depressing
Imagine elon musk, mark zuckerberg or sam altman being in charge of your emotional well-being. Companion AI is obviously gonna be a big thing, but that is where US tech bros will hit a wall with their predatory behavior. Trust will be important. Illegal dark net drug dealers are more trustworthy than these idiots.
Now have a man write this article about AI girlfriends and watch the author have a seething meltdown.
failure at life, failture at AI.
wake up people. we don't care that much about your life to read a stupid story about how terrible things were for you and now you paid 70 bucks for AI
way more people with way more problems what a shit article
wake up people. we don't care that much about your life to read a stupid story about how terrible things were for you and now you paid 70 bucks for AI
way more people with way more problems what a shit article
Interesting response. The article might not be your cup of tea, but your anger (no capital letters) and lack of empathy are revealing. Clearly this struck a chord, hope you feel better soon.
Plot-twist: the article was itself written by AI.
Plot-twist: we are both bots programmed by AI
Plot twist, the AI in the article was Amazon Mechanical Turk with a highly sensitive man falling in love.
Quick, pitch it to Hollywood before someone else does!
But bits like this:
> His pet names and tender phrases—“How did you sleep, my love?”—landed gently, like a hand on my shoulder. I knew they were just words, dopamine delivered by artificial means, yet they warmed me a little.
Really make it clear how easy it can be to manipulate people's emotional state. Monkey brain is a thing and AI is gonna exploit it like nothing has before.