1. The main risk isn’t the concept itself — it’s releasing it too fast. If intimacy‑related features are launched in the wrong format or at the wrong tempo, the biggest consequences won’t be philosophical debates. They will be: • gender polarization • emotional over‑dependence or backlash • rapid public trust erosion • regulatory pressure • and potential damage to the entire AI ecosystem
People underestimate how emotionally intense these interactions can become for average users. Even small mistakes at launch can scale into major social problems.
2. There is a viable and profitable path — but it requires sequencing. The demand for intimacy‑adjacent features is real. The market exists. What matters is how companies enter it.
A safer rollout sequence would look like:
(a) Start with partnered-use products (two real users interacting via AI) This supports existing relationships instead of replacing them. It avoids dependency spirals and removes the gender‑war dynamic entirely.
(b) Gather feedback → identify psychological failure modes → tighten guardrails This part should be slow and very deliberate. Intimacy features behave differently from productivity tools — the emotional risk curve is steeper.
(c) Only after that, consider individual-use products And even then, with: • strict screening • strong privacy isolation • controlled distribution, not mass viral rollout • clear expectations and limits
This allows monetization with much lower systemic risk.
3. Core point: In this domain, slow is actually fast. The companies that manage pacing — not just capability — will win long‑term. Rushing to “capture the market” risks blowing up public trust and harming the entire AI industry.
Profit is inevitable in this category. But how you earn it determines whether the ecosystem grows or collapses.
OracleKitten•1h ago