With Deepfake AI technology now making it possible to replicate images and videos of persons as well as emulate their voice, and GenAI technology making it possible to build a chatbot with a unique personality it is now possible for humans to replicate the deceased in digital format, or within a physical object such as a doll.
A persons social media history can be imported in to a large language model (LLM) & by using natural language processing training
(NLP), deep learning
and fine tuning
a GenAI chatbot can be created to emulate that persons personality. By using AI voice synthesis & cloning, a persons voice can be also cloned. Furthermore, by using deepfake technology, fake images and videos of a person can be created. By combining these technologies, a replicant of a person can be created in digital format that can be indistinguishable from the original person.
This replicant, of a deceased person can them be imported into a replicated digital environment where users can interact and communicate with the replicant. Alternativity, via usage of 3D printing a doll resembling the deceased can be created and embedded with a chip that holds the LLM software and be be embedded with a speaker and a microphone allowing verbal conversations with the doll using the voice & personality of the deceased.
With advancements in robotics, it will be possible to provide the replicant the ability to engage and interact with our physical environment. However, this may only be in the reach for the wealthy, due to the costs involved in robotics. Most replicants may only be generated using free or cheap Deepfake & GenAI software that is already available online.
This will raise ethical concerns regarding a persons privacy, including their privacy after death. If a person specifies in a will that they give permissions for their likeness to be used for replicating them in digital format after they have passed away, then those are the wishes of the deceased person. However, what about persons who have not given permission?
There are cultures, that have concerns regarding images of the deceased. I will not name those cultures here, as I do not speak for those cultures. Some cultures, however, may feel strongly against replicating deceased members of their culture with Deepfake and GenAI technology. It will be best to enquire with various cultures on their views regarding this manner.
Religious organisations may also have views on replicating the deceased, such as replicating religious figures or engaging in practices that can be considered as necromancy. It will be best to consult with religious organisations about their views regarding replicating the deceased with Deapfake and GenAI technology.
Cyber criminals & cyber stalkers can make use of replicant technology in a form of psychological warfare, such as by replicating the deceased and placing them in digital environments that emulates the suffering of the deceased. This can amount to cyber harassment and trolling of the family members of the deceased.
Replicated videos of the deceased may be used in acts of forgery, such as by creation of fake wills and testaments for fraudsters to exploit the inheritance wishes of the deceased. Measures will need to be undertaken to detect and revoke any wills and testaments that contains deepfake imagery.
Replicated images and voices of the deceased are not actually the deceased but can be indistinguishable from the deceased person with advancements in AI technology. Ethical concerns of this technology include how can the voices and images of the deceased be used, manipulated or commercialised?
Images of the deceased have been used for some time, typically the images used are actual photographs, voice recordings and videos of the deceased, this is a cultural norm that many cultures do accept. Cartoons and impersonations of the deceased have also been the norm for quite some time, many cultures also accept this, while some dont. Voices of the deceased have been impersonated, sometimes for entertainment, or educational purposes. However, these impersonations of the deceased have always been distinguishable from the actual deceased person. The ethical concern is that with Deepfake and GenAI technology these impersonations of the deceased will be made to be indistinguishable from the deceased person.
Personally myself, I do not use social media, so I do not have to worry about my online personality being used to create a digital replicant of myself. Other people, however, do use social media and it may be very freaky for them to discover a replicant of themselves has been created that looks like them, sounds like them, acts like them and even thinks
that they are the real individual (imagine a future video teleconference conversation with a bot that looks just like you, and you argue over who is the real version). This again brings light to the ethical issue, of who owns your likeness?
What if in the future, social media companies include in their terms and conditions of using their platform, that your digital likeness, including your voice and photographs are the property of the social media platform and that these images and voice samples can be sold to advertising companies. How freaky would it be if all a sudden an advertisement pops up on your phone with a video of some someone who looks just like you, and sounds just like you is trying to sell you a new brand of cereal?
Now, imagine the same scenario but instead of your digital likeness being used to sell you that cereal, a digital likeness of someone close to you who has recently passed away is used? I can imagine that many people and cultures will consider this to be very disrespectful. These are some of the ethical concerns that we now must consider with this Deepfake and GenAI technology.
Other ethical considerations, that may become issues several decades from now can be the use of deepfake technology being used to discredit history, where digital replicants, that are indistinguishable from the deceased are used as a form of trickery to defraud and rewrite history.
The usage of manipulated images to discredit, or defame individuals is a civil or criminal act in most countries. Using deepfake technology to blackmail, create fake sexualised images or harass and stalk can land a perpetrator in prison, with heavy fines. Other cases may be civil, such as victims of defamation can sue perpetrators who create deepfake imagery of the victim to discredit them. However, while the living is protected by defamation laws, does this also apply to the dead?
In conclusion, with the rise of this emerging technology, we will need to seriously consider the ethical considerations to protect the rights of the living, and also the dead.