An Ohio lawmaker wants to ban marriage between humans and AI-powered chatbots

Marriage equality is back topic From the conversation in the Ohio legislature, though, the debate – this time – is not about marriage between two humans, but between humans and software.

Yes, a recently introduced bill in the Buckeye State would ban legal marriage between AI programs and their human users. In case you didn’t know this was a thing, it is, and increasingly, it appears to be a thing People are interested a job. Number of Recent articles It highlighted a growing trend in which people seem to be saying “I do” to their romantic chatbots. Some fans of artificial intelligence They still have human partners But it’s clear that they feel a deeper connection with the chatbots in their lives.

Well, one Ohio lawmaker wants to put a stop to that. NBC-4 in Ohio He writes that Rep. Thaddeus Clagett, who chairs the state House Technology and Innovation Committee, has introduced legislation that would prevent such unions from occurring. In fact, it won’t just be that House Bill 469 To stop wedding bells for AI-human relations, it would also prevent AI programs from gaining the status of legal personality. The draft law stipulates the following:

No AI system may be recognized as a spouse or domestic partner or have any personal legal status equivalent to a marriage or union with a human or other AI system. Any purported attempt to marry or create a personal union with an AI system is void and of no legal effect.

Clagett’s interest in banning unions of AIs and humans seems to have more to do with preserving humans’ exclusive legal rights than with preventing people from becoming so emotionally attached to their software that they decide to bond with it. NBC-4 reports that the goal is to prevent AI programs from being able to perform the roles a marriage contract gives them, such as obtaining power of attorney or making financial decisions.

“As computer systems improve in their ability to act like humans, we want to make sure that we have prohibitions in our law that prevent those systems from being human in their agency,” Clagett told the media. He added: “People have to understand that we’re not talking about walking down the aisle to some tune and having a party with a robot that will be on our streets here in a year or two.” “It might happen, but that’s not really what we’re saying.”

It’s unclear what kind of support the legislation has among the rest of the state’s lawmakers, though we may find out soon. The bill, which Claggett introduced in September, is currently being debated in a state House committee.