Generative AI isn't just a matter of life and death. It's far more important than that
(2025/08/18)
- Reference: 1755505808
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/08/18/opinion_column_gen_ai/
- Source link:
Opinion Real versus virtual. Stolen versus synthesized. Generative AI is blurring the lines we used to think we could read between. Now, it's getting its teeth into life versus death.
The big topic right now in grieftech, as we must learn to call this new frontier, is how to safeguard against generative grave-robbing. It's hard enough for the living to keep their digital existence safe. What happens after death is a whole new ball game. We've recently seen calls for legal clarification and reform on who decides what happens to the digital afterlife of the analog deceased. The rules are [1]fragmentary , complicated and largely unformed.
What's needed is a sober, thoughtful debate considering what mix of personal rights and public abilities will be best for individuals, commerce and society. We aren't going to get this, at least not in the US and at least not in the next few years, where a merry free-for-all for the powerful and the preferred is the order of the day.
[2]
If this was the only complicated consequence of grieftech, it'd be enough. It is not. It's not even the most consequential. While there are worries about generative AI being used for the virtual resurrection and exploitation of the dead without permission, there are more profound implications of AI being used for the same purposes with permission or indeed active intent.
[3]
[4]
We are used to and expect a dead person's possessions to be distributed according to their wishes expressed while alive. It gets more complicated when things are intangible, like intellectual property rights with limited post-mortem validity, more so with matters of likenesses and distinctive voices. James Earl Jones left the rights to his voice to Lucasfilm, giving it the right to make money from the AI-generated voice of Darth Vader seemingly in perpetuity although the details aren't public.
What happens if not just the rights, but an extant AI, created during its owner's lifetime, is the asset in question? The opportunity exists for someone so minded to write a will setting up a trust to manage their assets after their death, on the condition that the AI version is consulted about decisions. It's not a huge jump from present day norms, as you can leave your fortune to organizations you agree with; you'll just be creating one where you continue to have an active voice.
[5]
This is a form of immortality. Not a very good one, to be sure, and arguably less good than the kind provided to the character played by James Earl Jones, but it will only get more powerful. All it needs is enough money and ego to want to keep control — a combination not unknown among humans — and the sale of grieftech immortality is an easy one. Personal behavioral data is already harvested like Iowa corn, but when you want that to happen to program your post-mortem AI, the industry will go into hyperdrive. There's [6]$13 trillion in middle class personal wealth in the US alone. Imagine being told you can take it with you when you go, after all.
There is so much money on the table that it is unthinkable that this won't happen. Whole industries will come into existence to better capture the personality, preferences and thought processes of the wannabe immortal. It will be the ultimate narcissistic self-reward system. Whatever argument is raised against it – the data is too incomplete, the AI too inaccurate, the model too inflexible to truly reflect the human – fixes will be found, new features added. The opportunities for new specialisms are endless.
[7]LLM chatbots trivial to weaponize for data theft, say boffins
[8]UK expands police facial recognition rollout with 10 new vans heading to a town near you
[9]I started losing my digital privacy in 1974, aged 11
[10]Suetopia: Generative AI is a lawsuit waiting to happen to your business
It is impossible to gauge the effects of such ideas. Death has great regenerative power in society, with even the worst, most powerful people subject to that great natural limitation. No matter how much money they control, it goes elsewhere. Organizations change leadership, new people and new ideas take hold. This circulation of power, money and consensus keeps society vital and evolving. When it fails, as it can when any group can put in place blocks to their removal, things get much, much worse.
This is what will happen if AI replicants of the rich and powerful get stitched into the management of their estates. There is no law against this, and while any will can be contested this is a whole new arena capable of disrupting one of the great certainties of existence.
Orwell said in [11]Nineteen Eighty-Four "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." At least that world was governed by mortals, even the worst of whom would die. Now imagine all the money in the world, and all the power, lucked up by AIs generating the wishes of the worst examples of humanity – forever.
[12]
Remember. The first AI immortal of our world is Darth Vader. Enjoy the summer. ®
Get our [13]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/09/dead_need_ai_data_delete_right/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://usafacts.org/answers/how-much-wealth-does-the-american-middle-class-have/country/united-states/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/15/llm_chatbots_trivial_to_weaponise/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/13/uk_expands_police_facial_recognition/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/13/digital_privacy_senseless_data_preservation/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/12/genai_lawsuit/
[11] https://search.worldcat.org/title/890674351
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
The big topic right now in grieftech, as we must learn to call this new frontier, is how to safeguard against generative grave-robbing. It's hard enough for the living to keep their digital existence safe. What happens after death is a whole new ball game. We've recently seen calls for legal clarification and reform on who decides what happens to the digital afterlife of the analog deceased. The rules are [1]fragmentary , complicated and largely unformed.
What's needed is a sober, thoughtful debate considering what mix of personal rights and public abilities will be best for individuals, commerce and society. We aren't going to get this, at least not in the US and at least not in the next few years, where a merry free-for-all for the powerful and the preferred is the order of the day.
[2]
If this was the only complicated consequence of grieftech, it'd be enough. It is not. It's not even the most consequential. While there are worries about generative AI being used for the virtual resurrection and exploitation of the dead without permission, there are more profound implications of AI being used for the same purposes with permission or indeed active intent.
[3]
[4]
We are used to and expect a dead person's possessions to be distributed according to their wishes expressed while alive. It gets more complicated when things are intangible, like intellectual property rights with limited post-mortem validity, more so with matters of likenesses and distinctive voices. James Earl Jones left the rights to his voice to Lucasfilm, giving it the right to make money from the AI-generated voice of Darth Vader seemingly in perpetuity although the details aren't public.
What happens if not just the rights, but an extant AI, created during its owner's lifetime, is the asset in question? The opportunity exists for someone so minded to write a will setting up a trust to manage their assets after their death, on the condition that the AI version is consulted about decisions. It's not a huge jump from present day norms, as you can leave your fortune to organizations you agree with; you'll just be creating one where you continue to have an active voice.
[5]
This is a form of immortality. Not a very good one, to be sure, and arguably less good than the kind provided to the character played by James Earl Jones, but it will only get more powerful. All it needs is enough money and ego to want to keep control — a combination not unknown among humans — and the sale of grieftech immortality is an easy one. Personal behavioral data is already harvested like Iowa corn, but when you want that to happen to program your post-mortem AI, the industry will go into hyperdrive. There's [6]$13 trillion in middle class personal wealth in the US alone. Imagine being told you can take it with you when you go, after all.
There is so much money on the table that it is unthinkable that this won't happen. Whole industries will come into existence to better capture the personality, preferences and thought processes of the wannabe immortal. It will be the ultimate narcissistic self-reward system. Whatever argument is raised against it – the data is too incomplete, the AI too inaccurate, the model too inflexible to truly reflect the human – fixes will be found, new features added. The opportunities for new specialisms are endless.
[7]LLM chatbots trivial to weaponize for data theft, say boffins
[8]UK expands police facial recognition rollout with 10 new vans heading to a town near you
[9]I started losing my digital privacy in 1974, aged 11
[10]Suetopia: Generative AI is a lawsuit waiting to happen to your business
It is impossible to gauge the effects of such ideas. Death has great regenerative power in society, with even the worst, most powerful people subject to that great natural limitation. No matter how much money they control, it goes elsewhere. Organizations change leadership, new people and new ideas take hold. This circulation of power, money and consensus keeps society vital and evolving. When it fails, as it can when any group can put in place blocks to their removal, things get much, much worse.
This is what will happen if AI replicants of the rich and powerful get stitched into the management of their estates. There is no law against this, and while any will can be contested this is a whole new arena capable of disrupting one of the great certainties of existence.
Orwell said in [11]Nineteen Eighty-Four "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." At least that world was governed by mortals, even the worst of whom would die. Now imagine all the money in the world, and all the power, lucked up by AIs generating the wishes of the worst examples of humanity – forever.
[12]
Remember. The first AI immortal of our world is Darth Vader. Enjoy the summer. ®
Get our [13]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/09/dead_need_ai_data_delete_right/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://usafacts.org/answers/how-much-wealth-does-the-american-middle-class-have/country/united-states/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/15/llm_chatbots_trivial_to_weaponise/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/13/uk_expands_police_facial_recognition/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/13/digital_privacy_senseless_data_preservation/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/12/genai_lawsuit/
[11] https://search.worldcat.org/title/890674351
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aKL5tzSDfC_4SyVw9YSarAAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Why should I care ?
Mentat74
I'll be dead anyway...
"enough money and ego to want to keep control — a combination not unknown among humans"
Anonymous Coward
You don't say?
The prospect of the "grieftech" enabled wraiths of Space Karen, Zuckerberg, Bezos etc etc haunting and Nazghûl-like poisoning the future is a pretty good definition of Hell on Earth.
To be honest the grief part of grieftech is a bit of a misnomer as this lot and fellow travellers would arguably be on everyone's "little list" of those who would not be mIssed.
Might be interesting to see where the Church eventually stands on this anathema. Humanae vitae?
"this is gonna get ugly"
The quicker it gets uglier, the sooner we might be rid of this bullshit.