Ein unheimliches „digitales Leben nach dem Tod“ ist keine Science-Fiction mehr. Wie können wir also mit den Risiken umgehen?

Imagine a future where your phone pings with a message that your dead father’s “digital immortal” bot is ready. This promise of chatting with a virtual version of your loved one – perhaps through a virtual reality (VR) headset – is like stepping into a sci-fi movie, both thrilling and a bit eerie.

As the digital afterlife industry grows, it raises significant [ethical](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0335-2) and [emotional challenges](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mind-brain-and-value/202009/the-psychology-the-digital-afterlife). These include concerns about consent, privacy and the psychological impact on the living.

I’d love to hear if people want a future „life“ after death. I was fascinated by the case of ALS sufferer Dr Scott-Morgan, who transitioned into the world’s first full cyborg – called Peter 2.0 and always wondered if he’d establish a digital presence after death.

But I’m also not sure about whether it helps the living. My twin committed suicide a long time ago and my mother’s grief is still profound. I can imagine her signing on to some of these services.

Except if we’ve found a way to copy the human consciousness or „soul“ and no one told me, if one opts for this service they’re essentially making an approximate copy of themselves to run on a computer then this really isn’t an afterlife.