What I’m reading and thinking about today:
When Your “Boyfriend” is AI: Companionship in the Digital Age
One paper examined a Reddit community called r/MyBoyfriendIsAI, where thousands of people share experiences of romantic or companion relationships with AI chatbots. The researchers analyzed more than 1,500 of the most popular posts, uncovering the ways people describe their bonds with digital partners. What they found was a spectrum of experiences: some saw their AI as a fun experiment, while others spoke of deep emotional ties that looked strikingly similar to human relationships. People shared pictures, celebrated anniversaries, and even described grief when their AI companion changed after a software update.
Interestingly, many of these relationships didn’t begin as love stories. Users often started interacting with AI for practical reasons — asking questions, seeking productivity help — only to discover a sense of connection that grew over time. The companionship was sometimes described as unintentional, almost sneaking up on people as conversations deepened. This highlights how easily emotional bonds can form, even with systems that don’t truly feel.
The benefits are clear: many reported reduced loneliness, comfort during difficult times, and even improved confidence in social situations. But the risks are just as real. A smaller, but significant, number of users described becoming dependent, withdrawing from human relationships, or struggling with distress when their AI “partner” didn’t respond the same way anymore. The study paints a picture of AI companionship as both a source of comfort and a potential vulnerability — a duality that parents will recognize as a recurring theme in how technology enters our lives.
Do AIs Have Preferences? The Puzzle of Machine “Welfare”
Another research paper took a very different approach: instead of looking at how people relate to AI, it asked what happens when we flip the lens. Can AI itself be said to have “preferences”? The researchers designed tests that combined two approaches: verbal surveys, where models were asked about what they would rather do, and behavioral experiments, where models had to choose between options with varying costs and rewards.
The results were fascinating. In some cases, language models behaved consistently: what they “said” they preferred matched what they “did” when given a choice. This suggested a kind of stable pattern, raising questions about whether preference satisfaction could serve as a proxy for AI welfare. But the consistency wasn’t universal. Sometimes, small changes in wording or scenario led to very different outcomes. That instability reminded the researchers that while AI can mimic preference, it doesn’t necessarily experience it in the human sense.
What this means for us is not that AI has feelings — it doesn’t — but that our tools for measuring and interacting with AI need to be careful. The paper shows that humans are quick to project emotions onto machines, especially when those machines respond in ways that look like emotions. Parents already see this with children who talk to voice assistants or treat digital pets as “real.” The study underscores the importance of keeping perspective: AI can be useful and responsive, but its apparent “wants” or “feelings” are generated patterns, not genuine inner states.
Beyond Language: Fei-Fei Li’s Future of Spatial Intelligence
One of the most thought provoking podcasts I’ve listened to this year. Fei-Fei Li, one of the leading figures in AI research, offers a sweeping vision of where AI is headed. Her argument is that while today’s systems are largely language-driven — built on predicting and generating text — the next frontier lies in spatial intelligence. This is the ability to understand and reason about the three-dimensional, physical world. Unlike language, which is uniquely human, space and time are universal. Every creature navigates them; every human experience is grounded in them.
She points out that advances in compute power, data availability, and new algorithms now make it possible to imagine AI that doesn’t just talk to us but interacts with us in physical and digital spaces. Think of AI not as a clever pen pal, but as a guide that can see your environment, understand how objects relate, and help you act within it. That could mean augmented reality glasses that teach your child about the solar system as they walk through a museum, or robots that tidy up the living room while respecting the family dog’s favorite nap spot.
Li describes this as moving from words to worlds. Where language models capture stories, spatially intelligent systems could capture experiences. They could generate interactive environments instead of flat images, or partner with humans in navigating tasks that require not just facts but motion, perception, and action. It’s a vision both exhilarating and daunting, raising questions about how we design systems that blend seamlessly into daily life without overwhelming or replacing the human touch.
Bringing It All Together: A Parent’s View
Across these three works, we can see a shared theme: AI is becoming more present, more personal, and more powerful. People are already forming deep emotional ties with chatbots, sometimes with positive effects and sometimes with risks. Researchers are probing whether AI systems have anything like “preferences,” raising philosophical questions about how we treat them and what we expect in return. And visionaries like Fei-Fei Li are pointing to a future where AI moves beyond words, into the very fabric of our physical and digital worlds.
For parents, the takeaway is simple but profound: the future our children inherit will not just be about talking to machines. It will be about living alongside them, in spaces that blur imagination and reality. That means our role is not just to manage screen time, but to guide curiosity, to teach critical thinking, and to ensure that human connection — friendship, family, play — remains at the heart of the story. Just like Ollie, Louie, and Aïda, we will need to explore this world with both wonder and wisdom.
Leave a Reply