Digital Resurrection: The Allure and Anxieties Surrounding the Rise of the Deathbot




A digital depiction of a man, illuminated by blue light, comforting a grieving individual at a funeral. Illustration: Guardian Design/Guardian Design/Getty

Rod Stewart surprised concert-goers in Charlotte, North Carolina, with notable guests. His longtime friend, Ozzy Osbourne, who passed away last month, appeared as if reuniting with other stars who have departed, such as Michael Jackson, Tina Turner, and Bob Marley.

The AI-generated images stirred mixed reactions among Stewart’s fans, with some finding them disrespectful while others deemed them beautiful.

In a related incident, Jim Acosta, former CNN White House correspondent, interviewed a digital version of Joaquin Oliver, a victim of a 2018 school shooting in Florida. Avatars of the deceased teenagers, created by their parents, offered him a unique comfort.

Recently, Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian shared an emotional experience on X, describing an animation of his late mother holding him as a child, admitting, “Damn, I wasn’t ready for how this would feel.” He reflected on the pain of not having video footage of their time together and the impact of re-watching the animation.




AI-generated images of Ozzy Osbourne and Tina Turner were showcased during Rod Stewart’s recent concert in North Carolina. Illustration: Iamsloanesteel Instagram

These instances exemplify the rising trend of ‘digital revival,’ where photos, videos, and various media create representations of deceased individuals. Numerous companies now market “grief bots” or “death bots,” raising critical concerns regarding exploitation, privacy, and the grieving process.

Elaine Kasket, a cybermedicist based in London, stated, “It’s now very technically possible because large-scale language models such as ChatGPT are now easily accessible to the general public.” These models can generate credible representations, using texts, emails, voice memos, images, and other digital remnants to create something that resonates deeply with those left behind.

Just a few years ago, the notion of “virtual immortality” felt like a distant dream; now, creating interactive avatars is not only feasible but becoming increasingly sought after.

A 2023 YouGov poll commissioned by the Christian think tank Theos revealed that 14% of respondents expressed comfort in interacting with digital representations of deceased individuals, with younger individuals showing more openness to “deathbots.”




Former CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta “interviews” the AI recreation of Joaquin Oliver, a victim of a 2018 Florida school shooting. Illustration: YouTube

The instinct to maintain bonds with deceased loved ones is not new. Families have traditionally cherished personal belongings that connect them to those they have lost—be it photographs, videos, audio messages, or songs that evoke memories. Dreams of the departed or perceived sightings in familiar places are also common. Some have even turned to seances for communication.

Michael Cholbi, a philosophy professor at the University of Edinburgh and author of *Grief,* noted, “We’ve built monuments, preserved hair, and kept letters. The question now is: does AI add anything to this?”

Louise Richardson, from York University’s Philosophy Department, emphasized that by visiting graves and interacting with personal items, individuals retain a sense of connection with their departed loved ones. “Deathbots can fulfill a similar role but may hinder the natural grieving process,” she cautioned, explaining that continuous engagement with a deathbot could obstruct acknowledgment and acceptance of loss.

People often ponder what a deceased relative would say or do in specific situations; “Now it feels like you can just ask them.”

However, there’s a concern that deathbots may present overly sanitized versions of individuals, as families might exclude less flattering traits when providing information for the AI generator.

There’s also a risk of dependency on technology. A report from Theos highlights that “digital necromancy can be misleading. You might think you’re interacting with a person, but you’re actually communicating with a machine.”

The emergence of virtual avatars has gained traction in Asia, particularly in China, where creating a digital avatar for a loved one costs as little as 20 yuan (£2.20). Estimates indicate that this market was valued at 12 billion yuan (£1.2 billion) in 2022, with projections quadrupling by 2025.

For a more advanced interactive avatar that moves and speaks with clients, costs can reach thousands of pounds. One prominent funeral service provider, Fu Shou Yuan International Group, suggests that the deceased can “come back to life” in a virtual setting. According to the Chinese Funeral Association, the total cost for creating such avatars can amount to about 50,000 yuan.

Cholbi pointed out that while the commercialization of grief raises ethical concerns, the funeral industry has a long history of upselling and deceptive practices.

Kasket warns about issues of privacy and the rights to one’s digital remnants. “The deceased have no say or control over how their materials are used,” she stated, noting the ethical ramifications of utilizing digital content to create profitable avatars without consent.

Some individuals are beginning to specify in their wills a desire for their digital materials to not be used posthumously.

Interactive avatars aren’t only for the deceased; the successful Abba Voyage show features digital replicas of the iconic Swedish pop group performing as they did in their prime, earning an estimated £1.6 million weekly. Audiences revel in singing along with the avatars while the actual band members, now in their 70s and 80s, look on from home.




Abba’s avatar, dressed in Dolce & Gabbana, as featured in Abba Voyage. Illustration: Abba Voyage

In a groundbreaking initiative, the UK’s National Holocaust Centre and Museum embarked on a project in 2016 to develop interactive avatars that can capture the voices and images of Holocaust survivors, enabling them to answer questions about their past in a future setting.

Cholbi noted that there’s an element of “AI hype” surrounding deathbots. “While some people may find this interesting, I anticipate that many will seek to maintain connections with the deceased through this technology for a considerable duration.”

He added, “This doesn’t imply that there won’t be enthusiastic participants; however, the prospects may not be as hopeful as commercial investors hope.”

Murazin highlighted that the rise of the deathbot industry prompts relevant discussions among ethicists and theologians. He suggested that the allure of digital revival could stem from a decline in traditional spiritual beliefs, leading to technological solutions that address the human desire for permanence and transcendence.”

“This reflects our modern era’s inclination to believe that technology can conquer death and offer eternity—a symptom of our contemporary culture,” he concluded.

Kasket remarked, “I have no doubt that these trends will continue to emerge and be utilized in beneficial ways.”

“When we lose our ability to navigate grief or convince ourselves that we cannot manage it, we risk becoming psychologically vulnerable. Grief and loss are fundamental aspects of the human experience, not merely technological challenges.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Innocent: The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of Tech Mogul Mike Lynch’s Fortune

“This is a landmark day in Autonomy’s history,” Mike Lynch declared in a press release on August 18, 2011, as he announced the sale of his software company, Autonomy, to Hewlett-Packard for $11 billion.

June 6, 2024, will be an even more significant date for Lynch.

After nearly 13 tumultuous years and a drawn-out trial in the heart of Silicon Valley, Lynch, once known as the “British Bill Gates,” has been cleared of fraud charges. The verdict marks a stunning reversal of fortune for the entrepreneur.

Lynch said Thursday he was “overjoyed” at his acquittal. “The truth has finally prevailed,” his lawyers declared.

He is now due to return to Britain, but the fight to clear his name continues. HP nearly won a civil lawsuit against Lynch and another Autonomy head, Sushoban Hussain, in London two years ago. The company is seeking $4 billion in damages. Lynch had previously said he would appeal the decision.

By all accounts, the acquisition was a disaster. Just five weeks after it was announced, HP’s CEO, who had signed the deal, was fired. Lynch left Autonomy less than a year later. The lucrative acquisition briefly cemented Lynch’s reputation as Britain’s most successful tech mogul. Its real legacy was more than a decade of bitter legal battles.

In November 2012, HP’s new management wrote down the value of Autonomy by $8.8 billion, alleging “significant” accounting irregularities, disclosure deficiencies, and “plain misrepresentations” prior to the acquisition. After years of investigations and legal proceedings on both sides of the Atlantic, a US federal grand jury indicted Lynch on criminal charges in November 2018. After the civil proceedings were concluded, the UK agreed to Lynch’s extradition.

His legal troubles grew last year. Having nearly lost a British civil lawsuit, Lynch also lost an appeal against his extradition in the UK High Court. A few weeks later, he was on a plane to California.

The trial in San Francisco has been a tough test for Lynch, who has been fighting to avoid extradition to the U.S. to face more than a dozen fraud charges. Federal prosecutors have a horrific record of convictions, forcing Lynch’s defense team to adjust their defense ahead of the trial.

From the start of the saga, Lynch has maintained that Autonomy’s collapse was the result of mismanagement of valuable HP assets, not fraud, but rather the failure of HP to provide evidence to support that claim, but U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who presided over the case, has barred Lynch’s lawyers from presenting evidence to support that claim.

Failing to focus on the post-acquisition situation, Lynch’s defense was based on three main arguments: first, that running a company like Autonomy is much more complicated than the prosecution would have the jury believe, second, that Lynch is a very different person to the person he has been portrayed to be, and third, that HP rushed to conduct its due diligence and close the deal.

One of Lynch’s lawyers, Reid Weingarten, declared on the first day of the trial that the government’s case was “black and white,” “and this trial is going to show that that’s not how the world works. The world works in shades of gray. The world is complicated.”

Life is “delicate and messy”, Lynch told the court, suggesting that his trial is effectively “like peering through the door to watch sausages being made. The thing you have to bear in mind is that if you take a microscope to a clean kitchen, you’re going to find germs. And I think Autonomy is no exception.”

Prosecutors tried to portray Lynch as an intimidating, ruthless businessman responsible for every aspect of the Autonomy empire. Jurors heard about the piranha tank in the atrium of the company’s headquarters and conference rooms named after James Bond villains.

Lynch said he found it “surreal” to hear government witnesses testify about many discussions and decisions he was unaware of. He said he delegated work that was outside his expertise and spent “about 30 percent” of his time at Autonomy in his later years spending time with his family and pursuing other hobbies.

“I believe the more you know about him, the better it is for us,” Weingarten told jurors before Lynch’s testimony.

Skip Newsletter Promotions


Privacy Notice: The newsletter may contain information about charities, online advertising and externally funded content. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect your privacy on our website and Google. privacy policy and terms of service Apply.

Prosecutors said Mr Lynch had “half a billion reasons” to commit the fraud – one for every pound he claimed to have made from HP’s acquisition of Autonomy – but Mr Lynch said the company wanted to remain independent.

Autonomy is one of the stars of London’s FTSE 100 stock index and is still in the process of acquiring itself. Lynch says he only started considering the idea after meeting with HP executives at a luxury home in the English countryside. It was the 64% premium on Autonomy’s shares that ultimately convinced the company to accept the deal.

Lynch argued that HP was determined to rapidly transform itself from a hardware maker into a software giant. press release It was only when it was released that the company announced it was buying his company, a process he recalled on the stand as “total chaos.”

Prosecutors argued that HP’s handling of the proceedings was irrelevant: They alleged that Lynch orchestrated a massive fraud over years and that Autonomy used a variety of accounting tricks to inflate sales growth.

But Lynch stressed that HP was “not at all” misled about Autonomy’s value. A California jury believed Lynch and dismissed the case, which the U.S. government had detailed, calling more than 30 witnesses.

Six years ago, a jury in the same court came to a different conclusion about one of Lynch’s closest business partners. Hussain, who served as Autonomy’s chief financial officer, was convicted of conspiracy, wire fraud and securities fraud in connection with the deal in 2018. He was released from a U.S. prison in January after serving a five-year sentence.

Lynch, who was awarded an OBE at the height of his career and served as an adviser to the British prime minister, spent much of the year before his trial under effective house arrest, guarded around the clock by two armed guards, and the threat of more than 20 years in prison loomed large if convicted.

The businessman left court a free man on Thursday. “I look forward to returning to the UK and getting back to what I love most – my family and innovating in my field,” he said.

Another important day.

Source: www.theguardian.com