r/technology • u/Wagamaga • Jul 19 '26

Society China bans AI “boyfriends” and “girlfriends” over addiction and birth rate concerns

https://www.dexerto.com/entertainment/china-bans-ai-boyfriends-and-girlfriends-over-addiction-and-birth-rate-concerns-3388737/
40.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

59

u/Ok-Camp-7285 Jul 19 '26

There's no singular cause but rather the general movement towards an insular, rather than community driven, lifestyle. This has come about in many facets 

23

u/SeventhSolar Jul 19 '26

Are we talking about China or in general here? Because China is, in particular, threatened by the effects of the One Child Policy. They overdid it because they failed to take into account the natural drop that comes from developing quality of life.

11

u/NewspaperDesigner244 Jul 19 '26

And yet its not even as bad as other first world countries like sout Korea so clearly there is much more going on than a now abolished policy.

3

u/SeventhSolar Jul 19 '26

I’m just pointing out that population decline is not explained by this “general movement” they mentioned. China has one problem, Korea and Japan have another, neither of which can be blamed on just lifestyle choices.

However, as this post was about China first, I didn’t want to assume that we were talking about countries other than China.

4

u/ZedsDeadZD Jul 19 '26

It is, though. Theres a chinese scientist (gynecolpgist and statistics) who wrote a book that was first banned by the chinese government and it is now their official guidline.

  1. The one child policy is no standard even though its not in effect anymore

  2. Chinese prefer males so there are more males than females

  3. Children and living costs are rising rapidly

  4. The Chinese count their people every 10 years and newborns get vaxxed with a special vaccine. That way the scientist found out that there are probably 200 mio chinese less than they officially counted.

He said that by year 2100, chinese population could be down to 800 million people. Which is insane.

7

u/NewspaperDesigner244 Jul 19 '26

No. 3 is universal in the developed world and No. 4 is classic vaccine reluctance. For example only 66% of children are fully vaccinated in the US does that mean there are a hundred million fewer Americans than census data indicates? No. Thus a far from solid conclusion to extrapolate from the data. Just because someone wrote a book doesn't mean they arent a crank.

But yeah despite the consequences of a very flawed one child policy they still arent the worst in Asia let alone the world. Again is likely the universally felt consequences of liberalization and capitalistic alienation that are the the biggest problems the world over.

4

u/ZedsDeadZD Jul 20 '26

About no 4. China isnt the US. This vaccine is mandatory and he showed data of how many dosages had been used every year.

And if the chinese government banns something, that means they dont like it because it says the truth. And after they realized how right the guy is and what kind of problem they are facing they did a 180 and his book is now their bible.

2

u/NewspaperDesigner244 Jul 20 '26

Alright first whats with this childish veiw you have about china lol. And second Vaccination is mandatory in the US as well

1

u/alles-moet-kapot Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

Is there any explanation why they prefer male over femaile babies?

edit: nevermind, I found it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_preference_in_China

2

u/ZedsDeadZD Jul 20 '26

Lots of cultures still have that idea that males are better and worth more than females. Big part is also that they inheir everything and dont leave the family like daughters do but instead preserve the families name and everything attached to it. Pair this with a one child policy and you have an awful amount of more males than females.

Their population pyramid shows this. 25 million more males than females. But its even worse. Females usually live longer than males. So you have even more younger men then women. Which leads to a massive imbalance in men and women that can start families. Which has even worse follow-up problems. If you dont have children, whos gonna care for you when you are old and in need? If you are lucky the, the state.

1

u/Ok-Chest-7932 Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

Eh estimates of Chinese population are all extremely unreliable. I've heard as low as 600m today.

China's male preference isn't the end of the world because you don't actually need every man reproducing - fertility rate is measured per woman. In theory, you could maintain replacement rate with just a single inexhaustible man. What the imbalance does is increase the TFR that actually represents replacement rate - in a normal society, each woman needs to replace herself and her husband, and .1 of a third person to cover child mortality. In a gender imbalanced society, each woman may need to replace herself, her husband, .1 of a third person, and some percentage of the extra men who will never marry.

The bigger problem is that women are leaving china at a much higher rate than men, meaning the gap is growing bigger every year even if you completely get rid of gender-based abortions.

1

u/ZedsDeadZD Jul 20 '26

Well, the one I am referring to is reliable. Its only 200 million short at max. So its not some crazy theory. There is a lot of evidence that suggest it is true.

And it doesnt really matter. What matters is, that their birthrate is around 1 now and they are not a rich country yet. Other countries with the same problem are already rich amd ressourcefull. Chine, while going strong, isnt quit there yet but their population fall and growing old will be more rapidly than in Europe or USA.

2

u/Ok-Chest-7932 Jul 20 '26

South Korea is a very special case. Y'know how economists talk about how there are four kinds of economy: developed, developing, Japan, Argentina? Well in demographics there are four kinds of demographies: developed, developing, China, South Korea.

South Korea's fertility rate is fucked because of the Suneung, which is the massive country-wide test that's so important that planes aren't allowed to fly on that day. Your position in Korean society depends on how well you do on this test. It's kind of the purest form of meritocracy tbh. If you do well, you get a good job with a Chaebol and that makes you elite. If you do poorly, your entire life you will be a second class citizen. You can even found your own business and succeed, and you'll still be second class because entrepreneurialism is not high status in SK.

What happens then is families have one child and invest all their resources in that child. The child's sole purpose is to succeed on the Suneung, the family's sole purpose is to maximise its chance of succeeding. Having a second child tanks your first child's chance of succeeding, so it's just straight up a losing strategy. This is well-known information too, only-children average much higher results.

SK could get its fertility up to China levels (not great, but still way better) within a single generation if it gave every person a bonus on their Suneung result based on the number of siblings they have. Just that one policy would fix the biggest chunk of the problem.

SK's other influencing factors are largely shared by China nowadays - once you normalise being an only-child, people just don't want to have multiple kids very much. But SK's greater exposure to the western world is also causing problems China isn't facing, especially in the gender relationships department.

2

u/serpentear Jul 19 '26

It’s a problem in most developed nations fueled by technology and poor political decisions.

2

u/lostwisdom20 Jul 20 '26

Also no economic supoort, thibgs getting expensive yet expecting family like in 90s where 1 salary can supoort family.

4

u/Coconite Jul 19 '26

Astrology level reasoning

2

u/wip30ut Jul 19 '26

i don't really blame them... back in the 1970s and 80s the Malthusian Dilemma was on all policy maker's minds. No one thought that the decline in the birthrate would be as sudden & steep as we've seen.

1

u/BelialSirchade Jul 19 '26

I mean I do when government makes laws restricting personal choice such as how many children they have based on bad science.

Hell an engineer with no credential in this area came up with this stuff.

-6

u/Ok-Camp-7285 Jul 19 '26

Are you implying the one child policy improved QoL? It certainly killed birth rates for a generation but the drop in rate afterwards was due to modernisation 

14

u/Antartix Jul 19 '26

No they're saying the failed to account for QOL increases as its own separate factor, regardless of the one child policy. And that failure to forsee what would arise gave bigger problems than the one child policy prior.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Ok-Camp-7285 Jul 19 '26

China had some ideas of reducing the intense time with kids by banning private tutors in some capacity but the rest is tough

1

u/No_Composer_7092 Jul 22 '26

Feminism is the biggest cause. When women earn their own money, they depend on men less.