AI relationships have entered the chat

Politico

14-03-2025

WEEKEND READ
Lawmakers have struggled for years to address the risks of social media for kids, largely without success. Now, AI chatbots have arrived on the scene, raising a host of new potential issues.
Researchers who've closely followed social media's impact on youth mental health are concerned that so-called relational chatbots — the ones that provide companionship — are just as likely to addict kids. In fact, they worry that bots, with their eerily human responses and warm conversational style, could be even more magnetic than current platforms.
'It could do what's very addictive in the research on romantic relationships and heartbreak,' said Jodi Halpern, a professor of bioethics and medical humanities at the University of California, Berkeley. 'It could not call you for a little while and then call.'
Such bots are growing in popularity and number. ChatGPT, an informational chatbot, has 400 million weekly users, with a quarter of teens using it for schoolwork. Character.ai, a more social-style product that lets users pick or design AI personas to interact with, has an audience of about 20 million monthly users.
Already, lawmakers are trying to get their hands around the issue. They have introduced hundreds of state bills with the hope of addressing some of the potential problems with AI, with a subset focusing on chatbots and generative AI. But those bills largely require AI companies to prominently disclose to users that they're talking to a bot.
One bill, California's SB 243, is different: It seeks to protect kids from becoming addicted to the platforms by focusing on how addiction happens. The bill was introduced by Democratic California state Sen. Steve Padilla of Chula Vista in January. Our colleague in California, Tyler Katzenberger, says the bill, which is being reviewed in the state Senate Judiciary and Health committees, could advance, though it's too soon to assess whether it will make it to Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's desk in its current form.
The bill would force companies to limit kids' exposure to AI that rewards users at random intervals to keep them engaged in conversation with chatbots.
It's based on the concept that intermittent rewards can drive addiction — a well-known psychological mechanism.
Essentially, when humans know there's a potential for reward, they'll keep engaging in an activity that might deliver the reward. When humans are rewarded at irregular intervals, they tend to seek out the reward more frequently. Slot machines are designed specifically to do this, for example.
Academics and tech experts, including renowned computer scientist Jaron Lanier, think social media platforms are configured around intermittent rewards. Academics think chatbots also have the potential to elicit similar responses.
It's unclear whether chat platforms use intermittent rewards — deliberately or otherwise — to keep users coming back for more. But that's why Halpern, who advised Padilla on the bill's concept, believes it's important to require companies to program out behaviors that could addict young users now.
WELCOME TO FUTURE PULSE
This is where we explore the ideas and innovators shaping health care.
Artificial intelligence helped ProPublica reporters analyze a database of 'woke' National Science Foundation grants compiled by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Two examples swept up in Cruz's dragnet: research studying the evolution of mint plants and a project developing devices to treat severe bleeding.
Share any thoughts, news, tips and feedback with Carmen Paun at [e-mail], Daniel Payne at [e-mail], Ruth Reader at [e-mail], or Erin Schumaker at [e-mail].
Are you a current or former federal worker who wants to share a tip securely? Message us on Signal: CarmenP.82, DanielP.100, RuthReader.02 or ErinSchumaker.01.
FORWARD THINKING
Lawmakers across the political spectrum increasingly argue that health care behemoths need to be broken up.
But at least one company is countering that integration is key to patient experiences — contending that the myriad problems with the health care system have more to do with its incentives than its size.
'I don't think the problem is just the size of these organizations,' Owen Tripp, co-founder and CEO of Included Health, told Daniel. 'The problem is that none of them actually put the member at the focal point of what care is all about.'
Included Health, an 'all-in-one' model that offers care for tens of millions of patients, is an example of integration working well, Tripp said. Instead of being paid to provide as many services as possible or throttle the number of services offered, the company asks a patient-centric question: How can he or she access better care in a way that's affordable?
Getting paid to deliver outcomes, not procedures, is a good start, he said — and sometimes the best way to do that is through large, integrated systems that can provide in-person or remote care for many health issues.
Major corporations, among the largest purchasers of care in the country, seem to agree. Nearly a third of the Fortune 100 are clients, Tripp said.
Even so: Critics have pointed to problems that can come with large, integrated health companies, including prices that are driven up or incentives to offer less care. And for years, Washington has been more intent on breaking up health giants than fusing them together as new concepts.