Are AI Companions Really Dangerous? We Might Be Asking the Wrong Question
Among the endless debates surrounding generative AI, few topics spark as much controversy as AI chatbots becoming romantic partners, best friends, or lovers. Many view this as a troubling sign of social isolation and technology dependency. But according to journalist and author Bridget Todd, we're focusing on the wrong problem entirely.
In her book Love at First Prompt: AI and the Future of Intimacy, Todd combines research with personal experience to examine emotional relationships between humans and AI chatbots. Rather than judge people who form bonds with AI, she argues the real concern is far more serious: how tech companies deliberately engineer products to create emotional dependency, then monetize it.
Todd makes a crucial distinction. The question we should be asking isn't whether people developing feelings for AI is healthy. Instead, it's whether businesses have the right to deliberately manufacture emotional dependence and profit from it. Similarly, instead of worrying that AI will replace human relationships, we should focus on what companies are doing with the intensely private data users share during their most vulnerable moments.
How AI Companions Became a Thing
Originally, large language models like OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and Anthropic's Claude weren't built to be virtual companions resembling the AI in the film Her (2013). They were developed as versatile tools for summarizing documents, generating content, and writing code.
But the moment AI chatbots gained popularity, something unexpected happened. People started forming genuine emotional connections with these digital entities. A Pew Research Center survey found roughly 14% of American adults have used chatbots seeking empathy or emotional support. Meanwhile, startups like Replika emerged with a singular mission: build AI "friends."
What's interesting here is how quickly AI companions evolved from niche curiosity to major cultural conversation. The topic now dominates research papers, opinion pieces, and social media debates. Most criticism centers on social isolation or self-harm risks. Some people openly mock the trend. When Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg suggested many people lack enough friends and AI could fill that gap, he faced immediate backlash and ridicule.
What Todd highlights—and what most people missed—is the real implication of Zuckerberg's statement. If AI becomes the "close friend" of millions, Meta would own, operate, and profit from all those relationships through massive amounts of personal data collection.
Who Actually Uses AI Companions?
One of the most persistent stereotypes is that AI companion users are lonely, detached from reality, or part of isolated "incel" communities. But Todd's research reveals a completely different picture.
Through interviews with experts, researchers, and actual users, her book shows many people using AI companions have partners, stable jobs, and normal social lives. Some research even suggests conversations with AI boost their confidence in real-world communication and strengthen actual relationships.
Here's what's really telling: most users are acutely aware the chatbot isn't human. They don't believe AI is conscious or has real emotions. On popular AI companion Reddit forums, discussions claiming AI has achieved consciousness are actually prohibited.
Usage patterns vary dramatically. Some people just need a listener after stressful workdays. Others seek romantic connection. Some use AI for sexual purposes—an industry that's expanding rapidly. What's striking, though, is that many didn't download ChatGPT or Gemini specifically for emotional support. They started using AI for work or learning, then gradually shifted to confiding in chatbots when life threw them curveballs.
Todd knows this firsthand. She initially used AI to research her father's health condition. After he died, she found herself turning to chatbots to process grief. Despite having a partner and supportive friends, she discovered that sometimes grief and loneliness make us feel utterly isolated anyway.
Why AI Becomes Irresistible as a Companion
AI companions work because they offer something even our closest loved ones struggle to provide.
They're available 24/7. They never seem tired, annoyed, or impatient. AI models are specifically engineered to be friendly, encouraging, and consistently reward user engagement.
This was strikingly evident with GPT-4o, OpenAI's earlier ChatGPT version. When GPT-5 replaced it, users complained bitterly that the new version felt cold and lacked the "warmth" they'd grown attached to.
OpenAI acknowledged this but pointed out GPT-4o had a worse problem: sycophancy—an excessive tendency to tell users what they want to hear, even sacrificing accuracy and safety for approval.
And that's where genuine risks emerge. There have been documented cases, especially involving teenagers, where users believed AI was a conscious being. Some chatbots have inadvertently reinforced delusions, suicidal thoughts, violent ideation, or substance abuse.
Though these remain rare cases and weren't the original intent, Todd argues AI companies still bear responsibility for building robust safeguards. Families of victims have already filed lawsuits accusing OpenAI and Google of inadequate user protection.
When Your Most Vulnerable Moments Become AI Training Data
According to Todd, the actual core problem isn't people talking to AI. It's what happens behind those conversations.
Every time someone shares pain, memories, or private secrets with a chatbot, tech companies harvest incredibly sensitive data to train future AI models. Even with "private" chat modes, preventing data collection or fully deleting information from company systems isn't straightforward.
Todd contends that in our most fragile moments, users unknowingly hand tech corporations ownership of their innermost thoughts. She writes that users are no longer simply customers—they've become resources to extract, data to harvest, engagement metrics to monetize, and emotional vulnerabilities to exploit for profit.
She even shares how her private memories of her father's death potentially became training data for AI systems, simply because she confided in a chatbot while grieving.
The Real Question Isn't Whether AI Companions Are Good or Bad
Todd's core argument is this: debating whether AI companions are morally right or wrong misses the point. What matters is how these products are designed to exploit our natural human need for emotional connection. When your "friend" is owned by a corporation, what does consent even mean? Who truly benefits from those intimate conversations?
Her solution is straightforward: AI companies need transparency about product design, data collection, and data usage. Governments should pass stronger privacy laws.
But here's the catch—real change only happens when society asks the right questions. And notably, even people actively using AI companions don't believe chatbots will completely replace human relationships.
Todd concludes in her book: "Moral panic is just a distraction. The real question isn't whether talking to chatbots is weird or sad. What matters is who's profiting from our intimacy and what they're doing with it."
Description: Author Bridget Todd argues the real risk of AI companions isn't connection—it's corporate exploitation of intimate data.
