3 ms·

China's Regulators Take Aim at "AI Boyfriends"

58 points by andai 12d ago

arionhardison 12d ago
Yes, Gov's require populations to have "real" offspring. Authoritarian or not, this makes sense. IMO its only a matter of time before some version of this hits the US; if it has not already.
- glouwbug 12d ago
  Zero AI child policy
- CamperBob2 12d ago
  That will only be true until it occurs to them to tax robotic productivity. This whole issue feels like a temporary one.
  - malicka 12d ago
    “Robotic productivity” is taxed in every country, including China — the profits go to some entity, to some company. With exceptions for the companies that manage to wrestle themselves in paying virtually nothing in taxes, that profit is taxed somewhere down the line. Nothing special about AI productivity, it’s just money.
    - CamperBob2 12d ago
      “Robotic productivity” is taxed in every country, including China Only by taxing the humans and human-based corporations that ultimately pay for it. On a longer timeline, the robots are going to become full-fledged economic actors in their own right.
- warkdarrior 12d ago
  Maybe we can have the government provide token quotas as you have offspring. Zero children = you (the parent) get zero tokens One child = the parents get 18-years worth of tokens Two children = the parents get 2 x 18-years worth of tokens ...
  - fennecbutt 12d ago
    I mean that's pretty much the current welfare system.
tcdent 12d ago
Is this "pacing the frontier"?
- verdverm 12d ago
  As a society, we do need to think about what "responsible ai" means and how we legislate for it without over regulating Ai outright
anon-3988 12d ago
I wonder how this would effect products like Love and Deepspace. That gacha game is HUGE.
- FMecha 9d ago
  Knowing how big the meltdown it was, you would need to regulate parasocial interactions (of which AI partners are) in general too - beyond just regulating this (and gachas).
KronisLV 12d ago
I kinda feel like if people have to turn to AI for companionship, it's the same as using AI for therapy - because the real thing isn't available and any number of systems have failed those people along the way. In a sense, that might be a bit telling of the modern day society: in what world is it so difficult to make meaningful connections to people, that if a real human relationship can be like 5x more meaningful (made up numbers, but surely people will agree that a real relationship can have more depth) than whatever the AI can provide, and people still choose that over the real thing? Or maybe the average person kind of sucks, or the way relationships are treated sucks, or maybe the AI is like crack for impressionable brains, or people don't want a real relationship and just want some sycophantic whatever, I don't know. Maybe it's a numbers game and some people will never find that for real (gender skew, demographics etc.), maybe it's a failing at those people not being properly socialized, maybe they themselves have something that society doesn't value ("Be yourself! No, not like that."), or just aren't pleasant for any number of reasons, don't have a third place to go for, don't have money to go and partake in social activities, have been brainwashed by hateful social media propaganda or any other mix of circumstances. Feels like it's probably easier to ban AI and pretend all of the other issues don't exist, rather than addressing them.
- verdverm 12d ago
  I'd recommend checking out Sherry Turkle's work. It's not as much about availability as friction. Ai does not come with the friction IRL does, so people turn to it as an "easy mode" I applaud the CCP for getting out in front of this one. It's way more a concern in my mind than data centers
  - KronisLV 12d ago
    > She is a specialist in how technology changes us psychologically and socially. Her new book is on our relationships with chatbots —Artificial Intimacy: Who We Become When We Talk to Machines. It will be published by Little, Brown and Company on September 29, 2026. What good timing, thanks! https://www.sherryturkle.com/the-author https://www.sherryturkle.com/the-author
vishnuaniyan 12d ago
[flagged]
PowerElectronix 12d ago
The CCP trying to get fertility rates up by cracking down on lesbians, paying money for children and now cracking down on whatever this is. It's no use, though. You need a good economic and social outlook to get people to even consider having children. And this ain't it.
- himata4113 12d ago
  Personally no amount of social outlook would want me want children. I simply don't want to have them I don't like raising or interacting with children it's just not in my nature and I really feel like a lot of that has to do with how people are nurtured.
- fragmede 12d ago
  Given comparison reports between people's opinions of AI and the future between China and the US, I think it is.
- bakugo 11d ago
  Indeed. Impoverished third world countries are known for having very low birthrates.
zinodaur 12d ago
I hope the rest of the world follows suit. Can you imagine the human misery venture capital could inflict by pursuing this vertical?
- stevemk14ebr 12d ago
  Yes, it already exists and it's called dating apps
  - DeluluDon 11d ago
    Dating apps are dead. Get with the times. It's 2026.
FLeXMurphy 12d ago
I legit thought the title was a linguistic euphemism targeted at dario and sama.
johnea 12d ago
A friend is in China right now. I spent some time on the phone with him the other day, as he wandered around the city where he's working. It was Sunday there, most people's day off, and he was amazed at how many people were out in the public parks, playing chess and go, kids on the playground equipment. inter-generational interaction. His impression was that China has a much higher level of people randomly interacting with other's IRL than here in the US.
- stronglikedan 12d ago
  I wonder how that looks per capita. I'd wager very similar between China and the US.
  - andai 12d ago
    Looks like their cities are 10x bigger on average than US cities, that's amazing. That means that if you go out for a walk you would be 10 times more likely to run into a friendly stranger who wants to chat.
    - em-bee 11d ago
      this is exactly it. cities are bigger and denser. the higher population density means that you have to go out of your way to not run into someone or do something that is not common for chinese to do, like walking around in streets where there are no restaurants or shops.
- em-bee 11d ago
  playing chess and go, kids on the playground most of those people were likely a bit older, already retired, and were out watching their grandchildren. sunday there is no school or kindergarten.
- Gathering6678 11d ago
  Could be just China has a much higher population density. US cities sometimes feel like "ghost towns" in China to me...
hollow-moe 12d ago
We need more meat for the meat grinder. You will reproduce.

58 points by andai 12d ago

Yes, Gov's require populations to have "real" offspring. Authoritarian or not, this makes sense. IMO its only a matter of time before some version of this hits the US; if it has not already.

glouwbug 12d ago
Zero AI child policy
CamperBob2 12d ago
That will only be true until it occurs to them to tax robotic productivity. This whole issue feels like a temporary one.
- malicka 12d ago
  “Robotic productivity” is taxed in every country, including China — the profits go to some entity, to some company. With exceptions for the companies that manage to wrestle themselves in paying virtually nothing in taxes, that profit is taxed somewhere down the line. Nothing special about AI productivity, it’s just money.
  - CamperBob2 12d ago
    “Robotic productivity” is taxed in every country, including China Only by taxing the humans and human-based corporations that ultimately pay for it. On a longer timeline, the robots are going to become full-fledged economic actors in their own right.
warkdarrior 12d ago
Maybe we can have the government provide token quotas as you have offspring. Zero children = you (the parent) get zero tokens One child = the parents get 18-years worth of tokens Two children = the parents get 2 x 18-years worth of tokens ...
- fennecbutt 12d ago
  I mean that's pretty much the current welfare system.

tcdent 12d ago

Is this "pacing the frontier"?

verdverm 12d ago
As a society, we do need to think about what "responsible ai" means and how we legislate for it without over regulating Ai outright

anon-3988 12d ago

I wonder how this would effect products like Love and Deepspace. That gacha game is HUGE.

FMecha 9d ago
Knowing how big the meltdown it was, you would need to regulate parasocial interactions (of which AI partners are) in general too - beyond just regulating this (and gachas).

KronisLV 12d ago

I kinda feel like if people have to turn to AI for companionship, it's the same as using AI for therapy - because the real thing isn't available and any number of systems have failed those people along the way. In a sense, that might be a bit telling of the modern day society: in what world is it so difficult to make meaningful connections to people, that if a real human relationship can be like 5x more meaningful (made up numbers, but surely people will agree that a real relationship can have more depth) than whatever the AI can provide, and people still choose that over the real thing? Or maybe the average person kind of sucks, or the way relationships are treated sucks, or maybe the AI is like crack for impressionable brains, or people don't want a real relationship and just want some sycophantic whatever, I don't know. Maybe it's a numbers game and some people will never find that for real (gender skew, demographics etc.), maybe it's a failing at those people not being properly socialized, maybe they themselves have something that society doesn't value ("Be yourself! No, not like that."), or just aren't pleasant for any number of reasons, don't have a third place to go for, don't have money to go and partake in social activities, have been brainwashed by hateful social media propaganda or any other mix of circumstances. Feels like it's probably easier to ban AI and pretend all of the other issues don't exist, rather than addressing them.

verdverm 12d ago
I'd recommend checking out Sherry Turkle's work. It's not as much about availability as friction. Ai does not come with the friction IRL does, so people turn to it as an "easy mode" I applaud the CCP for getting out in front of this one. It's way more a concern in my mind than data centers
- KronisLV 12d ago
  > She is a specialist in how technology changes us psychologically and socially. Her new book is on our relationships with chatbots —Artificial Intimacy: Who We Become When We Talk to Machines. It will be published by Little, Brown and Company on September 29, 2026. What good timing, thanks! https://www.sherryturkle.com/the-author https://www.sherryturkle.com/the-author

vishnuaniyan 12d ago

[flagged]

PowerElectronix 12d ago

The CCP trying to get fertility rates up by cracking down on lesbians, paying money for children and now cracking down on whatever this is. It's no use, though. You need a good economic and social outlook to get people to even consider having children. And this ain't it.

himata4113 12d ago
Personally no amount of social outlook would want me want children. I simply don't want to have them I don't like raising or interacting with children it's just not in my nature and I really feel like a lot of that has to do with how people are nurtured.
fragmede 12d ago
Given comparison reports between people's opinions of AI and the future between China and the US, I think it is.
bakugo 11d ago
Indeed. Impoverished third world countries are known for having very low birthrates.

zinodaur 12d ago

I hope the rest of the world follows suit. Can you imagine the human misery venture capital could inflict by pursuing this vertical?

stevemk14ebr 12d ago
Yes, it already exists and it's called dating apps
- DeluluDon 11d ago
  Dating apps are dead. Get with the times. It's 2026.

FLeXMurphy 12d ago

I legit thought the title was a linguistic euphemism targeted at dario and sama.

johnea 12d ago

A friend is in China right now. I spent some time on the phone with him the other day, as he wandered around the city where he's working. It was Sunday there, most people's day off, and he was amazed at how many people were out in the public parks, playing chess and go, kids on the playground equipment. inter-generational interaction. His impression was that China has a much higher level of people randomly interacting with other's IRL than here in the US.

stronglikedan 12d ago
I wonder how that looks per capita. I'd wager very similar between China and the US.
- andai 12d ago
  Looks like their cities are 10x bigger on average than US cities, that's amazing. That means that if you go out for a walk you would be 10 times more likely to run into a friendly stranger who wants to chat.
  - em-bee 11d ago
    this is exactly it. cities are bigger and denser. the higher population density means that you have to go out of your way to not run into someone or do something that is not common for chinese to do, like walking around in streets where there are no restaurants or shops.
em-bee 11d ago
playing chess and go, kids on the playground most of those people were likely a bit older, already retired, and were out watching their grandchildren. sunday there is no school or kindergarten.
Gathering6678 11d ago
Could be just China has a much higher population density. US cities sometimes feel like "ghost towns" in China to me...

hollow-moe 12d ago

We need more meat for the meat grinder. You will reproduce.