Noted music producer Bao Xiaobo utilized AI to ‘revive’ his deceased daughter and previously, an individual used AI to ‘revive’ their grandmother. What changes could such digital life enact?

The Ethics of AI Revivals: Where Does Memory Become Manipulation?

This topic certainly presents an ethical conundrum.

The principle here is, unless the individual expressed in their last wishes a desire to be ‘revived’ or gave explicit permission for their likeness to be recreated after their death, no one has the right to arbitrarily recreate someone else who has passed away - unless there are particular legal allowances for matters of national security or similar exceptional circumstances.

Those who have passed inherently hold a right to rest in peace.

Otherwise, if today we condone and applaud the use of AI as a tool for resurrection out of love and longing, what happens tomorrow when someone uses AI to recreate the prettiest girl in their class who has passed away out of admiration, or ‘revive’ a renowned leader or religious prophet out of respect, or reincarnate a bloodthirsty murderer out of curiosity, or resurrect a past movie star out of infatuation?

Can we legislate to allow such actions for ‘noble reasons’ and disallow them for ‘vulgar reasons’? Can we challenge and define the legal boundaries of what is noble and what is vulgar?

Does a person’s likeness and memory become public property after death that anyone can manipulate however they like?

What if an individual recreates the likeness of their ancestors into adult toys for sale? Should the dead be seen as private property, assets, or objects, and their feelings and desires discarded?

There might be one permissible exception, in which grieving parents may be allowed to ‘revive’ their underage children as AI - provided these parents are willing to assume the role of guardians to the AI.

Otherwise, there’s a danger of misuse such as immoral individuals reviving an underage girl AI for nefarious use.

Just because some hypothetical situations seem too far-fetched doesn’t mean they won’t happen.

Whether someone’s personal data should be allowed to be used to create an AI alter ego should require the consent of the person involved. This is a basic provision that will undoubtedly exist in future AI regulation laws.

And such provisions will surely specify that, unless explicitly expressed otherwise, it should be presumed that a deceased person would not have given their consent.