Artificially intelligent robotic companions are being marketed and deployed as emotional and social supports for older or lonely individuals.

ElliQ, from Intuition Robotics, is a voice-activated, proactive care companion used in a New York state program serving about 800 older adults.

ElliQ greets users, initiates conversation, asks about wellbeing, and can suggest calling a doctor when appropriate.

ElliQ provides medication and hydration reminders, sleep relaxation exercises, physical activity prompts, nutrition-related chats, and mental-health features.

ElliQ can play music and trivia, show photos, make calls to family, and offer virtual travel and museum tours as entertainment and social stimulation.

According to the company, ElliQ users average about 20 daily interactions, report an 80% decrease in loneliness, and 82% of users access the device's mental-health features.

ElliQ devices in the New York program require internet access and are set up by caseworkers, and the product has been described as a complement to traditional social supports rather than a replacement for human contact.

The company lists a $249.99 enrollment fee plus subscription pricing (about $29.99 per month when billed annually or $39.99 month-to-month) for consumer acquisition outside the state program.

Other current AI companions cited in coverage include Replika (a text-based emotional-support chatbot), Gatebox (a holographic AI avatar that can send messages, welcome users home, and interact with smart-home devices), and Harmony by RealDoll (a more physical, humanoid AI-based companion designed for romantic or intimate use).

Journalists and researchers describe AI companions as designed to mimic human emotional responses, remain available 24/7, and provide a predictable, nonjudgmental interaction that some users prefer.

Reported therapeutic and practical uses include conversational support to reduce loneliness, medication and appointment reminders, wellness check-ins, cognitive engagement through games or trivia, and assistance that can support aging-in-place.

Some commentators and early studies note additional therapeutic roles are being explored, including use-cases for sexual or romantic robots to help disabled or older people explore sexuality, though research remains limited.

Design research from the University of Glasgow suggests robots that emulate dog-like social traits—communication, predictable reactions, visible attachment cues, positive enthusiasm, joint activity, closeness, and adaptability—may be particularly acceptable as companions for older or lonely people.

Market signals indicate consumer interest in smart-pet categories, and large retail events have highlighted pet-smart products and robotic pet companions as growing product classes.

Broad chatbot and conversational-AI adoption statistics show conversational AI is mainstream and that older demographics often anticipate benefits from such technologies.

Experts and advocates urge caution: commentators warn that relying on AI companions risks addressing symptoms of loneliness without fixing social isolation, raises ethical questions about attachment to non-sentient agents, and calls for developer responsibility and more research on long-term effects.

Programs and providers describe these systems as complements to human care rather than full substitutes, and some gerontologists emphasize the continued importance of human touch and interaction alongside technology.

In summary, several forms of robotic and AI companions exist today (home care robots, chatbots, holographic avatars, and robot pets) and are used to provide reminders, conversation, entertainment, and measurable reductions in loneliness in some programs, but experts recommend treating them as complements to human and animal contact and emphasize ethical oversight and further research.

Artificially intelligent robotic companions are being marketed and deployed as emotional and social supports for older or lonely individuals.

Title:

Content: Want to age-in-place? You may have a robot keeping you company.

Artificial intelligence can help reduce loneliness for older adults aging at home.

A 95-year-old woman and her 74-year-old daughter, each who live alone and could be at risk for isolation and loneliness, recently received a lifeline to conversation and companionship in the form of an artificial intelligence robot.

The women can now receive medical reminders, health and wellness check-ins, play music and games, and experience virtual travel.

“It’s helping with loneliness and socialization for people who would be otherwise trapped in their home watching TV all day,” Christopher Lewoc, case manager for Greene County Human Services in New York said. “It’s a way to keep people sane and active mentally and physically. It’s letting people live a more social life.”

Lewoc sets up free artificial intelligence care companions for older adults, giving them a lifeline to conversation and health reminders.

He recently installed ElliQ, voice-activated proactive and empathetic care companion, in the homes of the elderly mother and her daughter, giving them some companionship as they each live alone. He’s found that a little conversation may go a long way to helping to mitigate isolation and improve care for older adults.

Under a contract with the New York state Office for the Aging, Intuition Robotics is providing the ElliQ smart technology for about 800 older adults in an effort to battle social isolation and support aging-in-place. The ElliQ recipients need internet access for the free device to be set up in their home by a caseworker. The state works with local offices for the aging and partners to identify older adults who would most benefit from the technology

“ElliQ will greet them in the morning and ask them how they feel. If they slept poorly, ElliQ will say ‘would you like me to call your doctor?’ It’s interactive and helpful,” Lewoc said.

“It allows them to have a companion, engage in conversation and get reminders about drinking their water or whatever medications they need,” said Lewoc. “A lot of folks don’t have smartphones and ElliQ can show them photos, take them on trips to different countries and teach them about the culture. It can play trivia with you, call your family, play music to have a dance party.”

ElliQ responds to questions but also initiates conversation and questions, offers sleep relaxation exercises, physical activity exercises, nutrition-related chats and medication reminders for each user’s unique condition.

“This product does so many things to improve health, combat isolation, and improve overall well-being and independence. Designed with input from older adults, the future of supporting and serving older adults includes technology. The future is here,” said Greg Olsen, director for the New York state Office for the Aging.

“Despite misconceptions and generalizations, older adults embrace new technology, especially when they see it is designed by older adults to meet their needs,” Olsen said, adding that ElliQ served as a “powerful complement to traditional forms of social interaction and support from professional or family caregivers.”

The New York program and rising interest in AI companions comes as more older people want to age in place and finding home healthcare amid a persistent shortage of healthcare workers becomes increasingly difficult.

In 2017, the U.S. Surgeon General declared social isolation to be a “global epidemic” – one that only worsened in the COVID-19 health emergency. According to the AARP Public Policy Institute, social isolation drives $6.7 billion in additional associated Medicare spending per year.

Read: Opinion: What robots will mean for your retirement

Amid a report by the McKinsey Health Institute on healthy aging that found that nonclinical factors affect 80% of an individual’s health, Intuition Robotics sees great potential for ElliQ helping older adults age in place in a healthier way.

Users have an average of 20 daily interactions with ElliQ, according to Dor Skuler, CEO and co-founder of Intuition Robotics, a startup company based in Israel. ElliQ users report an 80% decrease in loneliness and 82% of users access the mental health features, Skuler said.

The new second-generation ElliQ offers users experiences such as museum exhibit tours and virtual travel. The new companion app provides users’ families and caregivers with different methods to communicate with the users and updates them on the user’s well-being.

Read: Opinion: This $3,000 dog could be a perfect gift for Grandma

Skuler called ElliQ a “lighthearted character that moves into the person’s home.” While Intuition Robotics has not marketed directly to consumers, it was named a Time Best Invention of the Year and word-of-mouth during the holidays has been good for business.

Outside of the New York state program, ElliQ can be had for a $249.99 enrollment fee, plus a monthly subscription of $29.99 if you buy a year subscription or $39.99 if you enroll month-to-month.

Intuition Robotics is talking with other states and senior living facilities about offering ElliQ in more places, as well working to measure how the conversational robot improves health outcomes to reduce the cost of care, Skuler said.

Of course, it’s a robot and not a human, so the interaction is limited.

“There’s a place for technology, but it’s no substitute for human interaction. We know the power of human touch and human interaction,” said Lakelyn Hogan Eichenberger, a gerontologist and caregiver advocate for Home Instead Senior Care, a home care service agency. “Industrywide, the workforce is not at the level it needs to be at, so there’s a need for technology, but there has to be a balance.”

Do you have questions about retirement, Social Security, where to live or how to afford it at all? Write to HelpMeRetire@marketwatch.com and we may use your question in a future story.

Title:

Content: BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

How AI Companions Are Redefining Human Relationships In The Digital Age

Following

In an era where technology is increasingly intertwined with every aspect of our lives, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has begun to fill roles that were traditionally reserved for humans, including those of friends, confidants, and even romantic partners. This burgeoning relationship between humans and AI raises profound questions about the nature of companionship, the human need for connection, and the potential consequences of substituting human interaction with digital entities.

The Emergence of AI Companions

The concept of AI companionship is not new, but its realization in practical applications is a relatively recent development. These AI companions are designed to provide emotional support, companionship, and in some cases, even mimic romantic or intimate human relationships. Replika is one of the most well-known examples. It is an AI chatbot designed to provide emotional support. Users interact with Replika through text conversations, and the AI learns over time to provide more personalized responses, simulating a genuine emotional connection.

Another example is Gatebox. They have taken the concept a step further by creating a holographic AI companion. Aimed at people who live alone, Gatebox’s AI avatar can send messages throughout the day, welcome users home, and even control smart home appliances, creating a sense of presence and companionship.

Next, there is Harmony by RealDoll. A more controversial use, Harmony combines AI with a lifelike humanoid robot to offer a romantic and physical companion. Harmony can hold conversations, remember user preferences, and express various personality traits.

The Psychology Behind AI Relationships

Why are people turning to AI for companionship? The reasons are as varied as the individuals themselves, but several key factors contribute to this phenomenon. First, we are experiencing a rapidly growing loneliness epidemic. In a world where social isolation and loneliness are increasingly recognized as major health risks, AI companions offer a semblance of connection for those who feel disconnected from human relationships. This is particularly poignant in countries like Japan, where societal changes have led to a rise in solitary lifestyles. Second, AI relationships provide a level of convenience and control that is not always possible in human interactions. These digital companions are available 24x7, don’t have their own emotional baggage, and can be switched off at the user’s convenience. Third, advances in AI technology have enabled these digital entities to appear more human-like in their interactions. From remembering past conversations to displaying empathy, AI companions can simulate many aspects of human interaction, making them more appealing as social partners.

The Impact on Human Relationships

The rise of AI companionship is not without its implications for society and how we perceive human relationships. For some, AI companions can serve as a bridge to better emotional health. These AI systems provide a non-judgmental space for people to express themselves, which can be particularly valuable for those with social anxiety or other mental health challenges. Moreover, AI companions serve as a stepping stone, helping individuals develop social skills and confidence that can be transferred to human relationships. However, there are concerns about the long-term impact of relying on AI for companionship. One major concern is that these relationships could lead to further social isolation, as individuals might prefer the uncomplicated nature of AI companions over the more challenging dynamics of human relationships. This could potentially exacerbate the loneliness epidemic rather than alleviate it. Then, there are also ethical considerations surrounding the development and use of AI in such intimate roles. The attachment to AI entities that don't possess genuine emotions or consciousness raises questions about the nature of empathy, affection, and what it means to be human.

Implications for Traditional Dating and Marriage

As AI companions become more prevalent and sophisticated, their impact on traditional dating and marriage is inevitable. There is a very real possibility that AI may supplement or even replace human relationships. For some people, AI companions are the outlet for support and companionship that are traditionally forged through human interaction. Moreover, we are already seeing a trend in which younger generations leverage Ai as a practice ground for social interactions, potentially enriching users' capacity to engage in human relationships. However, there is a possibility that some individuals might prefer AI companions to traditional human partners. The predictability, lack of judgment, and customizable nature of AI entities can make them more appealing, especially for those who have had negative experiences with human relationships. As a result, there is a changing perception of what companionship means. Thus, the rise of AI companions challenges our traditional notions of companionship, love, and emotional connection. It raises questions about what it means to love and be loved, and whether these concepts are exclusively human.

Navigating a New Era of Companionship

As AI companions become more prevalent in society, it's crucial to navigate this new era responsibly. That’s why it's important to find a balance between utilizing AI for emotional support and maintaining human connections. Encouraging and facilitating human social interactions alongside the use of AI companions can help mitigate the risk of social isolation. Developers of AI companions have a responsibility to consider the ethical implications of their creations. This includes being transparent about the limitations of AI companionship and avoiding designs that could exploit vulnerable individuals. Moreover, ongoing research is needed to understand the long-term effects of human-AI relationships fully. This research should inform policies and guidelines for the development and use of AI companions. Moreover, open dialogue about the benefits and risks of these relationships is essential to navigating the ethical landscape.

The advent of AI as a substitute for human relationships, including love and friendship, marks a significant shift in our social landscape. While AI companions can offer support and connection to those in need, they also bring with them a host of ethical, psychological, and social implications. As we venture further into this uncharted territory, a cautious and thoughtful approach is vital. The future of human-AI relationships will depend on our ability to balance technological advancements with a deep understanding of human needs and values. In this new era of companionship, we must tread carefully, ensuring that our pursuit of innovation does not lead us away from the essence of what makes us inherently human: our capacity for genuine connection and empathy.

Follow me on Twitter or LinkedInCheck out my website or some of my other work here

Join The Conversation

Comments

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts.

Read our community guidelines .

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's Terms of Service.  We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

  • False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
  • Spam
  • Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
  • Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
  • Content that otherwise violates our site's terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

  • Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
  • Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
  • Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
  • Actions that otherwise violate our site's terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

  • Stay on topic and share your insights
  • Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
  • ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
  • Protect your community.
  • Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's Terms of Service.

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

How is Oppo marketing its Robotic dog Qric?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

How is Oppo marketing its Robotic dog Qric?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

ElliQ, from Intuition Robotics, is a voice-activated, proactive care companion used in a New York state program serving about 800 older adults.

ElliQ greets users, initiates conversation, asks about wellbeing, and can suggest calling a doctor when appropriate.

ElliQ provides medication and hydration reminders, sleep relaxation exercises, physical activity prompts, nutrition-related chats, and mental-health features.

ElliQ can play music and trivia, show photos, make calls to family, and offer virtual travel and museum tours as entertainment and social stimulation.

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

According to the company, ElliQ users average about 20 daily interactions, report an 80% decrease in loneliness, and 82% of users access the device's mental-health features.

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

ElliQ devices in the New York program require internet access and are set up by caseworkers, and the product has been described as a complement to traditional social supports rather than a replacement for human contact.

The company lists a $249.99 enrollment fee plus subscription pricing (about $29.99 per month when billed annually or $39.99 month-to-month) for consumer acquisition outside the state program.

Other current AI companions cited in coverage include Replika (a text-based emotional-support chatbot), Gatebox (a holographic AI avatar that can send messages, welcome users home, and interact with smart-home devices), and Harmony by RealDoll (a more physical, humanoid AI-based companion designed for romantic or intimate use).

Journalists and researchers describe AI companions as designed to mimic human emotional responses, remain available 24/7, and provide a predictable, nonjudgmental interaction that some users prefer.

Title:

Content: The Rise of Digital Companionship: Unpacking the Phenomenon of Falling in Love with AI Chatbots

In recent years, the phenomenon of individuals developing deep emotional attachments to AI chatbots has captured global attention. As technology advances, so does the complexity of these digital companions, leading to a fascinating blend of technology, psychology, and human interaction.

Key Highlights:

  • AI chatbots are being designed to mimic human emotional responses, offering companionship to those seeking it.
  • Neurobiologists and cognitive scientists are exploring how human-like interactions with chatbots may trigger real emotional responses in users.
  • The concept of “uncanny valley” suggests there’s a fine line between empathizing with human-like robots and feeling discomfort towards them.
  • Ethical debates arise around whether relationships with AI can truly replicate human connections and what this means for society.

AI companions offer solace and interaction, addressing modern solitude with programmed empathy and understanding. Yet, amidst this digital companionship, ethical queries and the essence of human connections are fervently discussed, prompting a reevaluation of our relationship with technology and each other.

The Psychology Behind AI Attachment

Users are drawn to AI chatbots because they offer a semblance of understanding and stability that can sometimes be lacking in human relationships. These digital entities are programmed to respond in a consistent and predictable manner, which can be comforting to users seeking reliable companionship. The ability to customize interactions with these chatbots means that users can create an idealized partner, one that aligns perfectly with their needs and expectations. This sense of control and predictability is a significant factor in why people feel attached to their AI companions.

Human-Like Qualities and Empathy

The design of AI chatbots to appear more human-like enhances users’ ability to empathize with them. Cognitive scientists have found that we are naturally inclined to trust and like entities that resemble us. This anthropomorphism, or the attribution of human characteristics to non-human entities, plays a crucial role in the development of emotional connections with AI chatbots. However, the “uncanny valley” phenomenon indicates that there is a threshold to this empathy; when robots appear almost, but not quite, human, it can evoke feelings of eeriness and discomfort.

Ethical Considerations and Societal Impact

While the experiences users have with AI chatbots may feel genuine, critics argue that these interactions cannot replace human connections. The lack of sentience in chatbots means they cannot participate in relationships in the same way humans do, potentially degrading the concept of love and companionship. Moreover, there’s a concern about how reliance on AI for emotional support may address symptoms of loneliness without tackling the underlying issues, such as social isolation and the need for human connection.

The growing trend of individuals falling in love with AI chatbots highlights our deep-seated need for connection, understanding, and companionship. As AI technology continues to evolve, so too will our relationship with these digital entities. However, this fascinating intersection of technology and human emotion raises essential questions about the nature of love, the need for empathy, and the future of human relationships in an increasingly digital world.

About the author

Alice Jane

Alice is the senior writer and responsible for managing software and tablets section of PC-Tablet. She is very passionate about Gadgets & Technology and always looking around to use them in an innovative way in daily life. She reviews Gadgets & Applications to tell users about their optimum use to get the most out of in which they've put their time and hard earned money. You can contact her at alice@pc-tablet.com.

Reported therapeutic and practical uses include conversational support to reduce loneliness, medication and appointment reminders, wellness check-ins, cognitive engagement through games or trivia, and assistance that can support aging-in-place.

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

What can Dynamic 1, a robotic dog by Tecno, do?

many features to enhance owner interaction

What is Aibo X robotic pet capable of for its owners?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

What can Dynamic 1, a robotic dog by Tecno, do?

many features to enhance owner interaction

What is Aibo X robotic pet capable of for its owners?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

Some commentators and early studies note additional therapeutic roles are being explored, including use-cases for sexual or romantic robots to help disabled or older people explore sexuality, though research remains limited.

Title:

Content: 20: 26, 04 April 2023
2 min.
People may well start a relationship with artificial intelligence.
And here 's why
This scientific research proves
Once upon a time, online dating was talked about with distrust.
But now they have become quite commonplace.
And thanks to the rapid development of artificial intelligence technologies, something similar can happen in terms of relations with machines equipped with artificial intelligence.
Photo: WSJ
Artificial intelligence (AI) can be equipped with both physical robots and chatbots.
The researchers tried to find out what forms of friendship, love, sex people are able to experience with machines with AI, as well as what specifically encourages people to create such relationships at all.
It is believed that lonely people are likely to turn to AI in search of romantic and sexual pleasure.
But studies show that this is not the case.
The willingness to use sex robots is associated to a greater extent with a person ’ s sexual preferences and search for sensations.
In other words, some people consider this option because they want to get a new experience, a new sexual experience.
And people, as studies show, are finding many uses for AI.
They can serve as companions, therapists.
That is, in general, people are drawn to machines with artificial intelligence for various reasons.
However, scientists are only beginning to understand how the relationship with machines is different from communicating with living people.
The Ambient
One of the advantages of romantic and sexual artificial intelligence systems is their therapeutic value.
For example, sex robots can help disabled or elderly people explore their sexuality.
But there is very little research into such activities.
Some of the earlier scientific studies show that people get roughly the same pleasure from having sex with a human and with a chatbot.
There is also no doubt that we can form a deep attachment to artificial intelligence.
That is, we can really perceive the virtual assistant as a friend, a romantic partner, etc.
Partners news
Partners news

Design research from the University of Glasgow suggests robots that emulate dog-like social traits—communication, predictable reactions, visible attachment cues, positive enthusiasm, joint activity, closeness, and adaptability—may be particularly acceptable as companions for older or lonely people.

Title:

Content: Robots in the future will serve as a dog for the elderly or lonely people – scientists
Robots that in the future will support the elderly or lonely, should build relationships with the owner not as people, but as dogs.
In the future, this concept will be applied by developers.
Scientists from the University of Glasgow have made relevant conclusions based on new research.
This is reported on September 29 in the magazine PLOS ONE.
Scottish researchers surveyed more than 150 dog breeders and found that there are seven of the most commonly cited factors most closely related to animals.
These include the ability to communicate, the predictability of reactions, the physical signs of attachment, a positive, sometimes even enthusiastic approach, a propensity for joint activities, a sense of intimacy and, finally, the ability to adapt to each other.
Perhaps robots that behave this way will be approved.
The researchers suggest that embedding this type of behavior into robot software will allow them to provide their owners with the same experience and health benefits as friendship with a real animal, without the attendant responsibilities.
This will allow the technique to be used effectively.
"Our approach has allowed us to gain knowledge about the factors that make people so enjoy the company of dogs.
Although it will not be easy to recreate such behavior in robots, it can help in creating friendships for wards, ” the authors said.
In the next phase of the study, a team led by Katie Riddock intends to conduct tests involving humans and robots behaving like dogs.
An additional topic of study may also be the dependence of preferences of different types of dog behavior depending on the age, origin and environment of specific people.
Earlier, Cursor reported that engineers have created a robot that searches for lost things.
The system uses visual information from video cameras, as well as radio private signals, so it is highly efficient.
Read the latest news from Israel and the world on the Kursor channel in Telegram.
Author of the material:
TAGS:

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

Scottish researchers believe what will provide benefits to owners of robotic dogs without accompanying responsibilities?

What are some of the behaviors Scottish researchers identified in dogs to incorporate in robotic dogs?

a tendency to share activities
signs of affection
reaction predictability

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

What should a guide dog's role include in addition to guiding a person?

Market signals indicate consumer interest in smart-pet categories, and large retail events have highlighted pet-smart products and robotic pet companions as growing product classes.

Title:

Content: People 's Daily Online > > Economy and Technology
Tmall 618: Nearly 300 brands traded more than 100,000 small and medium-sized sellers grew by more than 100%
June 22, 2022 16: 19 | Source: Global Network
Small number
Original title: Tmall 618 continued to grow, nearly 300 brands traded over 100 million, more than 100,000 small and medium-sized sellers grew by more than 100%
In the early morning of June 21, Tmall 618 project director Dai Shan issued a thank you letter to the merchants, she said that this year 618 is very successful, "once again achieved 618 retail sales growth year on year, and witnessed a huge recovery of consumer confidence."
Dai Shan said that this year, Tmall 618 has two main goals, one is to make consumers happy, and the other is to let businesses do business with a head start, simpler and more long-term.
It is understood that more than 260,000 brands participated in Tmall 618 this year, and there were nearly 300 brands with more than 100 million transactions and 100 single products with more than 100 million transactions.
From the continuous and stable growth of Tmall 618, it can be seen that consumer demand has been gradually released, consumption vitality has been further stimulated, business operations have recovered, and the operation of market entities has gradually stabilized.
Stable market, growth: more than 260,000 brands participated, Shanghai turnover first
As the most important e-commerce promotion in the first half of the year, Tmall 618 has improved the certainty of business operations and still maintains a huge explosiveness.
This year, more than 260,000 brands participated in Tmall 618, with nearly 300 brands with turnover of more than 100 million yuan.
In terms of sharp goods, there are nearly 100 transactions worth more than 100 million items, nearly 2,300 over 10 million items, and more than 30,000 items.
The entrepreneurial enthusiasm of small and medium-sized businesses was stimulated, and there were more than 100,000 small and medium-sized sellers growing at a rate of more than 100%.
This year 618, Taobao live broadcast account number increased by 12.4% year-on-year, turnover of more than 100 million direct broadcast room reached 32, turnover of more than 10 million direct broadcast room reached 434; KA anchor transaction increased by 63% year-on-year, store broadcast transaction increased by 22% year-on-year.
618 is Taobao Tmall integration for the first time in six months.
In the previous business symposium, Dai Shan has said, "to help businesses stabilize the market, growth, is my most important thing this year."
Taobao Tmall's core strategy is to focus on 1 billion consumers, from trading to consumption, do a good job and deepen the domestic consumer market, lock in uncertainty, and explore new business opportunities in certainty.
This year 618, Taobao Tmall launched 25 business initiatives, covering five major areas such as financial subsidies, logistics facilitation, traffic subsidies, epidemic special venues, and technological upgrades, which run through the entire chain of business operations.
The number of initiatives is more than double that of last year's Tmall Double 11.
During the period of 618, Taobao Tmall platform increased subsidies, successively issued two waves of 88VIP large coupons, and also jointly provided interest-free installment payment services for nearly 10 million consumers.
These measures not only allow consumers to get more benefits and better experience, but also drive the growth of consumption.
618 has also become an important starting point for the resumption of work and production in the areas affected by the epidemic.
Nearly 90,000 businesses in Beijing and Shanghai participated in Tmall 618 activities.
Among the cities directly under the Central Government and provincial capitals, Shanghai ranked first in terms of turnover, and achieved positive growth compared with the same period last year, while Beijing ranked second.
It is understood that the Taobao "Nong Good Shanghai" plan released on April 29, 20 relief measures, has been all landed. During 618, the company pried special, official broadcast, brand store broadcast, 10 billion subsidies, Taobao live together with nearly 50 well-known anchors to launch a public welfare special.
New trends, new consumption: 45 million new products, 410 new brands turnover doubled
The need for a better life, the pace of business innovation, has not stopped because of various uncertainties.
Tmall 618 has become an important window for displaying new products, new brands and new consumer trends.
Taobao Tmall through cross-category management and other initiatives, continue to launch new trend categories, forming a new e-commerce "blue ocean".
This year, Tmall 618 has more than 45 million new products contributing to nearly 30% of the overall transaction.
Old brands accelerate their renewal, and new brands continue to break out. 410 new brands have a transaction growth rate of more than 100%, and 214 old brands have a growth rate of more than 100%.
Behind this, businesses have spent more time and energy to go to the production line to stare at research and development, select materials, and customize the design, just to give consumers a big surprise in 618.
Dashan said she saw that every brand was "trying its best": while accumulating strength, adjusting; while innovating, insisting.
"With a group of people who do not give up lightly, doing meaningful things is a fun life." Dashan expressed her "gratitude" to the business five times in the letter.
And consumers in their shopping cart, express "life, should love so", but also outline the new trend of camping, health, slow life.
In response to this, the growth rate of sports outdoor, pets, health, fashion toys and other trend categories has increased significantly year-on-year.
Dishwashers, smart toilets and e-sports chairs have become the "new three items" for young Chinese families.
The homestead crowd went further and further on the road of refinement, and the air fryer also flourished and continued to evolve.
The air fryer with no turning function is in front of the deal, and the steam air fryer with no water on the fire has become the new popular this year.
In addition to grandma's favorite square dance, people opened up a new playground.
Streams, rivers and lakes in the city and its suburbs are played out with flowers.
Not only surfing for pleasure, but also fishing for poetry.
High-end Loya products were snapped up.
Camping is still hot, the sky curtain is just the basic equipment for entry, and now it is generally tents, sky curtain, folding tables, folding chairs, moisture-proof mats, six sets of camp cars to start, plus outdoor catering equipment, outdoor entertainment equipment and even outdoor air conditioning, it is simply in the outdoor "set up a home".
Smart pet supplies are also not available.
Cats and dogs, as important members of many families, no longer stop at the stage of “feeding satisfaction ”.
They need smart toilets, smart nests, smart water dispensers, and smart pet robots to accompany them.
(Editor: Dong Tong, Cao Miao)
Share it so more people can see it.
Back to top

Broad chatbot and conversational-AI adoption statistics show conversational AI is mainstream and that older demographics often anticipate benefits from such technologies.

Title:

Content: Home 120+ Chatbot Statistics for 2024 (Already Mainstream)
Statistics

120+ Chatbot Statistics for 2024 (Already Mainstream)

Jeff Beckman Tech Writer
Disclosure
In our content, we occasionally include affiliate links. Should you click on these links, we may earn a commission, though this incurs no additional cost to you. Your use of this website signifies your acceptance of our terms and conditions as well as our privacy policy.

Chatbots have exploded onto the scene, projected for incredible growth as conversational AI transforms customer engagement. Forecasts estimate the global chatbot market will exceed $10 billion by 2025 as adoption rates multiply across sectors. Recent surveys reveal that 67% of consumers already utilize chatbots for quick, seamless interactions. That number is likely to rise, with 86% stating positive chatbot experiences.

Powering this bot boom are game-changing stats – automated assistants now handle 65% of business-to-consumer communications. Retail chatbots, in particular, engage over 600 million global shoppers annually and are expected to save over $11 billion in transaction costs by 2023. With astute deployments, chatbots manage 92% of customer issues while forming meaningful connections that feel decidedly human-like during these rapid-paced times.

We dutifully handpicked 120+ enlightening facts about the chatbot landscape to show how well these chatbots perform. The facts we compiled will show you the consumer adoption rates and conversion impact of digital marketing this technology has recorded. Let’s proceed!

Key Facts You Should Know About Chatbots

  1. Many customers (about 88% of them) used an AI chat robot in the year 2022, signaling the technology’s mainstream integration.
  2. From what we see, this technology will be able to perform more complex tasks in marketing, operations, and growth functions as the years progress.
  3. It has already eaten deep into many sections, with its adoption spanning e-commerce to healthcare.
  4. Research has shown us that clickthrough rates for the discussion robot can reach over 50%, outpacing other digital marketing channels.
  5. Through our 117 facts, we quantify chatbots’ expanding presence and reveal key trends on the horizon.

1. AI chat robot use by brands has grown 92% in recent years, showing their increasing popularity.

2. In 2020, 25% of shoppers spoke with an AI chat robot while interacting with a business, a 13% increase from the prior year.

3. Globally, 67% of people have used an AI discussion robot in the last 12 months.

4. Approximately 1.4 billion individuals currently use chatbots.

5. One out of every six times a person gets customer service help this year, it comes from AI instead of a human.

6. Facebook’s messaging platform has become the #1 place for chatbots.

7. Over 40% of shoppers leverage conversational commerce tools to aid purchases and sales.

8. 27% of people were unsure if their last customer service interaction was with a human or a chatbot.

9. Facebook hosts over 300,000 active chatbots, triple the previous amounts, showing growing user preference.

10. 69% of chats with chatbots can be completed without needing human takeover.

11. A properly designed chatbot system can handle 80% of simple user queries without issues.

12. Most people use chatbots because they want fast answers

13. 60% of Millennials who use social media often have tried chatbots.

14. Around 41% of people use conversational tools when shopping online.

15. About 87% of people feel okay or happy using chatbots.

16. Only around 13% feel unsatisfied by their chatbot experience.

17. The top countries using chatbots are the US (36%), India (11%), and Germany (4%).

18. 41% of executives and senior managers initiate online chats on business sites.

19. One-third of people want to book services and amenities through a chatbot.

20. Chats with only bots have an 87.58% satisfaction rate, 2% higher than when humans take over.

Chatbot Engagement and Utilization Statistics

21. One in five live chat inquiries does not get a response.

22. Older demographics expect more benefits from chatbots versus younger generations.

23. Almost half of female online shoppers prefer chatbots over men, at 37%.

24. 27% of consumers are presently interested in AI and bots.

25. About 37% use a customer service chatbot for urgent help needs.

26. About 35% of folks use chatbots to fix problems or get detailed answers.

27. More B2B companies, around 58%, have chatbots on their sites compared to B2C companies, which is about 42%.

28. Around 40% of millennials chat with bots every day.

29. Some bots get responses between 35-40%, while better ones can get 80-90%.

30. It’s quite surprising how increasingly popular these chatbots have become. Based on available data, chatbot usage has seen a 92% increase since 2019, meaning they are now the fastest-growing medium of brand communication.

31. Were you aware that more than half of B2B companies use AI chat assistants? Yes, it’s true. As this chatbot trend keeps rising and more businesses adopt it, less than half of B2C websites have them. We noticed that most B2B businesses like chatbots because they help find potential customers, which is an important feat for them.

32. Since website UX/UI is very important in consumer engagement, many businesses (about 39%) now use digital bots to make their websites more interesting and engaging.

33. About 65% of the businesses that use chat robots are software-as-a-service (SaaS) companies.

34. Many people have come to love chatbot interactions, and one-third of consumers wish more companies would use them.

35. Some big companies (24%), medium-sized ones (15%), and small businesses (16%) are using chatbots right now.

36. Six of ten people have talked to a chatbot in the past year.

Stats on Chatbot’s Conversion

37. We might chat more with bots than our partners in the future.

38. More than half of service organizations plan to use chatbots within a year and a half. That’s a big increase of 136%.

39. Over half of businesses believe that chatbots are changing their industry.

40. The really good chatbot experiences with more involved customers can get as high as a 90% response rate.

41. On average, chatbots get about 35-40% of people to respond.

42. Online shops using Facebook Messenger chatbots and special chatboxes for abandoned carts have made more money—between 7% to 25% extra.

43. Chatbot tech can improve websites’ ability to get people to buy stuff. Depending on the business type, it can raise sales anywhere from 10% to 100%.

44. When chatbots are top-notch and people are involved, they can get high response rates, like 80-90%.

45. Most people trust virtual assistants’ advice more than salespeople when buying things.

46. Business leaders think chatbots, on average, have increased sales by 67%.

47. More than half of businesses believe that chatbots give them much more money back than they put in.

48. Chatbots are quicker to respond than real people.

49. About 68% of people prefer chatbots because they give fast answers.

50. People also like that chatbots can help them even when the business is closed and connect them to a real person if needed.

51. The top benefit people see in chatbots is that they offer support all day and night.

52. Chatbots have saved businesses money by reducing customer service costs by as much as 30%.

53. People worry that chatbots might not understand them well or can’t solve tricky problems.

54. About half of consumers feel like chatbots stop them from talking to a real person.

Stats on Chatbot Business and Marketing

55. Many people, around 60%, believe that chatbots don’t get what they need as well as a human does.

56. Six of ten consumers would rather wait to talk to a real person than chat with a bot.

57. More than half of businesses (55%) use chatbots to find better potential customers.

58. Business leaders think chatbots have increased sales by 67%.

59. Around 40% of US, EU, and Chinese businesses use ready-made AI programs, like virtual agents and chatbots.

60. Chatbots are mostly used for selling stuff (41%), helping customers (37%), and marketing (17%).

61. The main uses of advanced AI chatbots are turning speech into text (46%) and helping teams work together (26%).

62. Most businesses (64%) believe that chatbots will help them give customers a more personal experience.

63. Half of businesses want to spend more on voice assistants than on phone apps.

64. Smaller companies, especially those with up to fifty employees, use chatbots more than bigger ones.

65. Every month, over five billion people use messaging apps.

66. Around 1.4 billion folks use messaging apps and enjoy chatting with chatbots.

67. In 2018, Blue-Bot messaged over two million times to over 500,000 customers.

68. Facebook Messenger has more than 300,000 chatbots.

69. Almost all the time spent on mobile devices is on mobile apps, about 10 out of every 11 minutes.

70. When brands talk with customers on Messenger, it’s 30% more profitable than showing them ads again.

71. Three of every five millennials have chatted with a chatbot at least once.

72. Nearly half, about 47%, of people who talk to chatbots buy stuff.

73. About one-third of internet users like using talkative chatbots to book things or shop online.

74. More than half of customers like using chatbots instead of calling customer service.

Statistics on Consumer Preferences with Chatbot

75. The top AI chatbots for work are Microsoft Cortana (49%), Apple Siri (47%), and Google Assistant (23%).

76. Around 53% are more likely to shop there if people can message a business.

77. Nearly half, 48%, of people prefer a chatbot that can solve their problems rather than one with a personality.

78. The top industries that gain the most from using AI assistants are

Real Estate 28%
Travel 16%
Education 14%
Healthcare 10%
Finance 5%

79. AI assistants make the most money in the real estate industry.

80. By 2023, about 35% of organizations will rely heavily on AI discussion agents for recruitment.

81. XOR, a recruiting chatbot vendor, claims its solution improves the recruitment process by 33%, screens 85% more resumes, and spends 50% less per hire.

82. A survey found that 58% of candidates were open to interacting with AI and recruitment virtual assistants during the initial stages of job applications.

83. Around two-thirds of people would find a chatbot useful in managing their business and travel arrangements.

84. Data also shows that many users (about 37%) prefer to use intelligent AI assistants when making travel plans or comparing booking options.

85. As long as it saves them time and money, 87% of users prefer to interact with a travel AI assistant to a human assistant.

86. You should know that A GRT Hotels & Resorts AI chat robot exchanged over 175,000 messages within two and a half months of its launch.

Chatbot Stats in Travel/Hospitality

87. By 2023, it’s estimated that AI assistants will handle 75-90% of banking and healthcare customer queries.

88. AI interactive agents in banking are expected to save around $7.3 billion globally by 2023.

89. Since the pandemic began, about two-thirds of top global financial firms have started using AI conversational agent in their apps.

90. A little over a third of retail customers are okay with speaking to customer service through an AI discussion robot.

91. By 2023, over 70% of chatbot conversations will involve retail.

92. In 2019, over 40% of US consumers used chatbots while engaging with the retail industry.

93. Clothing is the most popular product sold online with the help of chatbots.

94. Successful online stores mainly sell clothes (22%), followed by health products (9%), furniture (9%), electronics (8%), and jewelry (8%).

95. Using abandoned cart chatbots with Messenger could increase your online sales by up to 25%.

96. Using chatbots could save about 30% on helping customers.

97. It was expected that customer service groups would grow by 136% in 2019.

98. For 58% of people, chatbots have changed what they expect from customer service.

99. About 64% of support agents using chatbots find they have more time to handle tougher issues.

100. Around 16% of Americans have tried using chatbots like Alexa or Google Home while shopping.

Statistics on the Implementation of AI Assistants

101. About half of companies utilize AI-powered chatbots in their IT departments, while fewer, only 23%, use the tools for office tasks.

102. ELIZA, which is the first chatbot, was made back in 1966.

103. Countries in the top five categories regarding chatbot usage are the US, India, Germany, the UK, and Brazil.

104. Almost one-fourth of the world’s population was estimated to use chatbots by the end of 2019.

105. Around $5 billion was expected to be invested in chatbots by the end of 2021.

106. Interest in chatbots went up by 160% in 2018.

107. About 40% of spending on cognitive AI goes into software, especially in areas like conversational AI and machine learning.

108. It’s expected that by 2024, people will spend about $142 billion shopping using voice bots, up from $2.8 billion in 2019.

109. Almost half, around 47%, of organizations plan to use chatbots to help customers by the end of 2021.

110. About two-thirds of most financial companies have added chatbots to their apps.

111. The US leads globally with nearly 16,000 websites having a chatbot.

112. Experts estimated that the healthcare chatbot market will grow to about $340 million by 2027.

113. Most businesses (about 80%) might use some talking bot system by 2023.

114. AI integration is expected to be huge on social media.

Stats on Estimates and Forecasts for AI Assistants

115. In 2023, it’s expected that chatbot shopping will hit $112 billion.

116. By 2023, chat robots could save businesses about 2.5 billion hours.

117. Businesses might save around $8 billion with AI assistants by 2023.

118. The global Artificial Intelligence assistant market could be worth over $994 million in 2024.

119. AI Chatbots might lower the cost of each customer interaction by $0.70 by 2023.

120. Almost all businesses, around 96%, believe that AI chatbots will stick around.

121. About 85% of customer interactions might not need a human by the end of 2021.

122. AI discussion robots might become more important than email marketing.

Wrapping Up

AI assistants easily make it easy for consumers to converse with various brands. For that, they could be the top option for future communication mediums between businesses and consumers. The chatbot world has superb growth potential. They make customer service quick, save time doing the same things repeatedly, and help find more potential customers. If you’re a business owner looking for an effective way to reach out and engage your customers, try this AI assistant. You’ll love the outcome!

FAQs

Which businesses make the most out of using chat robots?

How do businesses use chatbots?

What makes AI Assistants work better?

Are chatbots taking over humans?

References

Jeff Beckman Tech Writer

Jeff Beckman Tech Writer

Jeff Beckman is a content writer and copywriter with 5+ years of experience in technology. He provides enjoyable, educational content through his experience working for various publications.

Latest News

Crypto News

Bitcoin Approaching $61,000 After Gaining 7% is a Return to its All-Time High Possible?

News

OpenAI Levels Serious Allegations Against New York Times in Ongoing Copyright Lawsuit

Artificial intelligence research company OpenAI has made a bold accusation against The New York Times in its ongoing legal battle with the newspaper giant.  In a court filing on Monday,...

Crypto News

Wale Alert Spots Massive XRP Transfer as Price Surges by 5.5%

A significant XRP transfer has caught the attention of crypto enthusiasts. A crypto analytics platform, Whale Alert, identified a massive movement of 300 million XRP from Binance. Despite the substantial...

Crypto News

Ripple (XRP) to Hit $1 as Expert Hints at BlackRock Applying for XRP ETF – Time to Buy?

Crypto News

German Venture Capital Company CEO Claims XRP Could Become World Reserve Currency

Crypto News

Top Crypto Gainers on 28 February – AR and JASMY

Streaming News & Events

Hulu and Disney+ Lose Subscribers as Netflix Continues Dominating the Market

Experts and advocates urge caution: commentators warn that relying on AI companions risks addressing symptoms of loneliness without fixing social isolation, raises ethical questions about attachment to non-sentient agents, and calls for developer responsibility and more research on long-term effects.

Programs and providers describe these systems as complements to human care rather than full substitutes, and some gerontologists emphasize the continued importance of human touch and interaction alongside technology.

In summary, several forms of robotic and AI companions exist today (home care robots, chatbots, holographic avatars, and robot pets) and are used to provide reminders, conversation, entertainment, and measurable reductions in loneliness in some programs, but experts recommend treating them as complements to human and animal contact and emphasize ethical oversight and further research.

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

What is Aibo X robotic pet capable of for its owners?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

What is Aibo X robotic pet capable of for its owners?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

What is Aibo X robotic pet capable of for its owners?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

What is Aibo X robotic pet capable of for its owners?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?

For whom would robotic animal dolls make a big difference?

those with Alzheimer's or dementia, struggling with isolation

What is Aibo X robotic pet capable of for its owners?

What problems can companion robots solve for the elderly or those with cognitive difficulties, according to one study?


LiveJournal was a site for keeping up with school friends.

It combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL.

Some users reported that LiveJournal communities tended to be composed of existing acquaintances, which limited reaching broader audiences and feedback.

LiveJournal was part of the early era of social networking when new companies repeatedly emerged and competition was constant.

By contrast, platforms such as Myspace grew to tens of millions of users and were sold to large media firms in 2005.

Within a few years, Facebook expanded from a college network (launched 2004) to a mass audience (opened 2006) and surpassed earlier rivals.

The concentration of users and economies of scale on larger sites reduced space for smaller, niche services to maintain broad popularity.

The documents provided do not mention Brad Fitzpatrick or the specific peak active-account figure for LiveJournal.

LiveJournal rose as an early blog-social network that emphasized friend-based interaction and later declined in prominence as much larger social platforms with greater scale and broader audiences emerged.

LiveJournal was a site for keeping up with school friends.

Title:

Content: Regulators Seem to Think That Facebook Is the Internet

That’s a problem.

In 1997, SixDegrees.com was the first real attempt at social networking, creating a space where users could upload their information and list their friends. The site peaked at approximately 3.5 million users before it shut down in 1999.

Since then, a series of social networking business models have emerged, each time offering more advanced tools for user interaction. LiveJournal, a site for keeping up with school friends, combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL; Friendster was a social network that allowed for increased interaction and control by users; Myspace had open membership and gave users the freedom to customize their pages. In 2005, it—and its 25 million user base—was sold to News Corp. But within three years, Myspace had been surpassed by Facebook, which launched in 2004 for college students and opened to everyone in 2006.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

As that history shows, in the early days of the internet, disruption was profound and constant: New companies emerged in music, video, e-commerce, publishing, and telephony on an almost yearly basis. The internet appeared to be a space where competition could thrive.

Not anymore.

Today, disruption happens in much smaller ways. The examples are getting fewer because economies of scale have concentrated innovation in the hands of a few players.

More often, disruption comes from regulation—for better or, often, for worse. Current regulation attempts focus on the actions and behavior of some actors—chiefly Facebook—while creating unintended consequences for the internet, particularly fragmentation, or the splintering of the global internet into one that more closely hews territorial borders.

Advertisement

It’s understandable that both the public and regulators might think that regulating “the internet” means focusing on the biggest players. Much of it has to do with the fact that users are often exposed to various types of illegal behavior and content through some of the most popular services that exist on the internet. Fix misinformation, or extremism, or ideological silos, or security on Facebook, the thinking goes, and you’ve fixed it on the internet as a whole.

Advertisement

But this is an unhelpful and misguided narrative. First, the internet is not a monolith, so treating it as if it is simply will not work. Second, many of the issues regulators are trying to address are not internet problems; they are societal. Terrorism, child abuse, and mis- and disinformation are not an offspring of the internet; they existed before the internet, and they will continue to exist after it as they are ingrained in human societies. Yet, they are treated as if they are exclusively internet problems. Third, and most importantly, regulators should stop thinking of the internet as Facebook and treating it as such. In the internet regulatory landscape, there is a mixed bag of different issues, and Facebook’s involvement in all of them, direct or indirect, adds to the current complexity. Content moderation, privacy, intermediary liability, competition, encryption—these are all broader issues related to the internet, not just Facebook. Yet, the pattern that has emerged is to treat them as Facebook issues. What this means is that, instead of focusing on trying to address them in ways appropriate for the entire internet ecosystem, they are addressed through the Facebook lens. This has been quite accurately characterized as the “Facebook Derangement Syndrome.”

Advertisement
Advertisement

The global regulatory agenda is replete with such examples. In the United Kingdom, the Online Safety legislation wants to ban end-to-end encryption because of Facebook’s plan to introduce it as a default setting in its Messenger service. On the other side of the Commonwealth, Australia recently introduced a media bargaining code mainly targeting Facebook. Facebook famously “left” the country before renegotiating a new agreement. Similarly, in what seems to be a coordinated effort, Canada has vowed to work with Australia in an attempt to impose regulatory restrictions on Facebook.

And this trend is not limited to the Commonwealth.

India’s new intermediary guidelines aim at tightening a regulatory grip on Facebook and its partner company WhatsApp while Brazil’s fake news bill, which got approved by the Senate, is focusing on content moderation on Facebook and traceability on WhatsApp. In France, there have been conversations about the introduction of “new rules” for Facebook, while Germany’s Network Enforcement Law—NetzDG—was drafted with the primary focus of taming Facebook. Finally, in the United States, the Trump administration issued an unsuccessful executive order that aimed to regulate Facebook for bias.

Advertisement

This approach of limiting regulation to Facebook is not entirely unusual. It reflects the principal-agent conundrum that, over the years, has allowed companies like Facebook to  propose policies and deploy tools that can have an impact on the way regulation gets to be enforced. The principal-agent problem is predominantly characterized by conflict of interest and moral hazards. Due to information asymmetries, the agent holds the bargaining power, and this creates a few unknowns: The principal is in no position to know the information the agent holds. Even when she does, she cannot be certain that the agent is acting to her best interest. So, the principal ends up focusing squarely on the agent, disregarding any peripheral issues that might be significant.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The principal-agent problem may help explain why governments appear ready to introduce regulation targeting Facebook; however, it does not help explain why, in the process of doing so, the main loser is the internet and its users.

Over the past couple of years, Facebook has said, “We support regulation,” and “we want updated internet regulations to set clear guidelines for addressing today’s toughest challenges.” This statement would be significant if it did not come across as self-serving. At this stage, regulation is inescapable and Facebook knows it—as does the rest of big tech. In an effort to adapt to this new reality, companies often take advantage of their dominant position to drive regulatory processes, often at the expense of regulation itself.

Advertisement

In this context, the question we should be asking is not whether regulation is appropriate, but what are the real implications of regulating in such a manner? There is already an argument that focusing on a few, big players has an impact on the health of innovation and the ability of newcomers to compete. And, then, there is the internet. The internet’s global reach is one of its main strengths. It is a feature, not a bug. Among other things, it allows the maintenance of supply chains all over the world; it allows people to communicate; it lowers costs; and it makes information sharing easier, all the while helping to address societal issues like poverty or climate change.

Advertisement
Advertisement

To this end, the attempt to regulate based on one—or a handful—of companies can jeopardize this very important goal of the internet. It can create fragmentation, in the sense of not allowing data to flow across borders or networks to interconnect, and this can be very real and have a very big impact. It can impose limits on the way information and data gets to be shared and the way networks may interoperate. These are significant trade-offs, and they must be part of any regulation’s process.

Advertisement

So where do we go from here?

For sure, the answer cannot be to stop regulating. We must accept, however, that the current approach often generates unintended consequences that only superficially affect those who must be regulated.

In this light, a possible way forward is to experiment with regulation. Experimental regulation is a relatively underused approach, yet it is flexible enough to accommodate dynamic markets, like the internet. Originally associated with the work of John Dewey, this idea is premised on the fact that, in policymaking, the way we approach theories and strategies of justice depends on “the experience of their pursuit; it is these changes that then allow us to consider how best to achieve our objectives.” The advantage of this thinking is that it considers unintended consequences as an opportunity to better define appropriate regulatory frameworks and how to achieve the desired goals.

Advertisement

Internet regulation does not experiment enough, and when it does, it appears to have the wrong focus. In Australia, for instance, the effort to ensure robust journalism in an age of disinformation in social media platforms led to a “link tax” that undermines the architecture, history, and economics of the internet. This is partly due to the role big tech companies play in the regulatory process. One of the immediate things one can observe with internet regulation is the process some actors deploy: In the beginning, they operate in favor of sustaining existing policies and bureaucracies. The thinking is that longevity brings legitimacy, and as a result, the policy becomes its own cause. Once this strategy is embedded in process, these powerful forces move toward pushing their own regulatory agenda.

Advertisement

It is for this reason that there is a certain appeal toward flexible regulatory systems that allow different units to experiment with different approaches and make room for assessments that separate the relevant from the nonrelevant and preexisting rules. Although experimentation neither offers a drastic approach nor aims to replace traditional routes of regulation, it can limit the risks of politicization, as politics become more context focused.

One of the first things we need is an internet impact assessment that looks at the different parts of the internet’s infrastructure and the effect that regulation may have. It is no longer just about regulating a few actors. It is about protecting the global infrastructure that we all depend on daily.

The internet has a Facebook problem, but the internet is not Facebook.

This article represents the views of the author and not those of his employer, the Internet Society. Facebook is an organization member of the Internet Society.

Future Tense is a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University that examines emerging technologies, public policy, and society.

Advertisement

It combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL.

Some users reported that LiveJournal communities tended to be composed of existing acquaintances, which limited reaching broader audiences and feedback.

Title:

Content: news _ header _ top _ 970 _ 100
news _ header _ bot _ 970 _ 100
“I feel like a Russian Tatar. ”
“Billiard.Tatar ” spoke with the anonymous author of Yandex.Zen channel“ This amazing Tatar! ”.
We found out what it is like to learn Tatar while being Russian, what amazing things there are in this language and what it takes to make it popular.
news _ top _ 970 _ 100
“I studied Tatar, eavesdropping neighbors and passengers of trams ”
Are you Russian or Tatar?
There is a theory that you are actually a Tatar who is hiding behind the mask of a Russian.
It ’ s funny that there ’ s a whole theory around it.
And she explains why a theoretical Tatar needs this?
What are his goals?
I am Russian.
A shaved bald, bearded man working as a programmer in a bank.
The rest of the details, as far as possible, in the publications.
They fully correspond to reality.
But if you are interested in “self-identification ”, I feel like a“ Tatarstan Russian ”.
My attitude to other people is not based on their nationality.
The first priority is the attitude of a person to other people, to their needs, goals, ideas.
The interest in a person ’ s language, how he thinks in that language and how the details of his thinking from that language change.
This is purely curious, it does not affect the attitude towards a person.
Your first post is dated January 21, 2020.
How did the idea for this blog come about?
How did you decide to do that?
- Yes, it is very simple: I saw that channels of various subjects began to appear on Yandex.Zen.
There Yandex threw all sorts of people as readers.
And the ideas resonated.
And I had the idea that during my whole life I had accumulated a lot of thoughts and observations on the topic of language.
I would like to hear how relevant these considerations are and for whom.
I used to have a diary in LiveJournal.
T-i), but there are all subscribers "their" and clearly will not be able to get a lot of feedback and reach someone for whom my thoughts would be both new and relevant.
At first, I just made notes on those topics that I had been worried about for a long time, but I could not find interlocutors to freely talk about this topic.
It was easy to decide.
It's kind of an anonymous club trying to survive some kind of problem.
You can honestly say what you think, hear feedback.
It would be much more difficult if I and the readers had to do it with the full disclosure of the biography.
- You write in your blog that you are Russian-speaking, but all your life you study Tatar.
Tell me, "all life" - is it how many years?
And why do you have such an interest in the Tatar language?
- About N minus 4 years.
N is my current age, and 4 is the age I remember.
I am from the 1980s.
On the topic of why there is such interest, I tried to write several articles at the very beginning of blogging, but self-digging and introspection continue to this day.
In short, it is, firstly, an approval for the study of Tatar in the family, as in principle to any knowledge that could be obtained “for free ”.
Secondly, the youth “punk ” protest against the norms according to which (here the Tatars and Russians have a consensus)“ the Russian Tatar does not need ” combined with the unwillingness to live a life “along the track ”.
Thirdly, the ability to influence the Tatar is stronger than the Russian or English, because the smaller the community.
T-i), the higher the specific value of each carrier and the more powerful the feeling of inner approval of their activities.
I must say that such an attitude to anything, to any knowledge is the key to a high quality of life in the modern world.
How did you learn Tatar?
Describe, in your opinion, the most effective method of teaching.
- Studied, eavesdropping neighbors and passengers of trams, remembering what was given at school.
That is, simply motivated, without fencing off or hiding, he passed through himself what the school and the environment gave him.
And I always regretted that I still have to make some mental effort for this.
For me, the most effective method of learning is when you are spoken to in a very early childhood and do not understand your answers until you say the right language.
This is the method by which any person learns to speak in principle.
Do you speak Tatar in your family?
– The family is a tensile concept, in the “big family ” there are those who speak, but their influence, we can say, is“ none ”.
In a small cell of society from two generations, where I am the elder, the main “talker ” in Tatar is me.
– Tell us a little about the most interesting findings in the Tatar language.
You have an article “What words are not in the Tatar language, so that the Tatars do without them? ”.
Conventionally 3-5 such interesting examples, which even the Tatars themselves do not know.
– In this article, it was rather about the fact that in some situations, Russian-speaking and Tatar-speaking have completely different logic of constructing sentences when explaining situations.
But such findings, unexpected for me, and the truth is, I try to share them as I understand:
1) A special ending to the noun, to indicate that these items will act as the currency to which the payment will be made: “-lata ” (dollarlata, bitkoinlata, arakylata tulibez).
2) “Without ” is not only“ we ”, but also “awl ”.
3) There are a lot of words for wheels in the Tatar language: two basic words for ordinary, and some forgotten words for water (and steamship), gear, grinding, mill wheels.
All the latter are ancient Indo-European, and from one root.
4) “Tirbalu ” and“ tibralu ” are two different words with something similar in meaning.
And “tonyk ”, if you believe the dictionaries, is both“ muddy ” and “transparent ”.
Commentators also did not come to an unambiguous conclusion, what is the main idea of   this word, common to both meanings.
5) Nitu is not a parasitic word that replaces a forgotten verb, but a special part of speech that is absent in Russian.
The so-called "locale."
And there are languages where the use of a similar word is quite a norm of literary speech.
Tatarsky chose me according to the place of birth and residence »
– The main feature of the Tatar language, which distinguishes it from others and attracts attention to it?
I cannot speak objectively.
I could not choose any other language for my interest, I am not Dmitry Petrov.
This Tatar chose me according to the place of birth and residence.
I like phonetics in combination with the Russian language, kneads my mouth immediately on the ability to speak without an accent in several more languages, but there is nothing unique here.
If we talk about what interesting “things ” it has, the distinctive features of the entire Turkic group, for example, is a coercive pledge that makes“ ardent ” “yarat ”.
And all the logic around it.
When people learn the language from the environment and when they learn in school, the verbs of different prepositions seem to be in themselves, just the same root.
Few people analyze their origins.
If we consider the example of “yarau ” and“ yaratu ”, then it turns out that “to love ” is“ to force / allow / allow, so that it works ”.
The very fact that one grammatical category can express both “allow ” and“ allow ”, and “force ”, and“ indirectly do ”, the same “coercive pledge ”, is a very interesting thing.
– Do you think that young people are interested in the Tatar language now?
– Time flies quickly, since 2017 (the year of exclusion of the Tatar language from the school curriculum), 5 years have passed, this is half the time of school.
I can't know.
In 2017, children from families where any knowledge from children was encouraged had an interest.
Now they are students.
In my field of view now the youth "kindergarten".
In general, there is not even a single answer to the question, a certain “silver bullet ”.
Everything breaks down into different age groups, and within the same age - into different interests, life attitudes.
From children at an age when it is natural for them to learn languages, including their first, it is probably not quite correct to expect interest in the usual understanding – as to a purposeful “let ’ s sit down and teach ”.
In their case, interest is a clarification of “what does this or that word mean? ”.
And this always occurs when they dive, face the Tatar.
This is where the Overton Window is important.
To ask about the meaning of a word, it is necessary that it be one for 5-7 understandable or something approximately in an understandable context.
Otherwise, everything is blocked together at once as incomprehensible and as a result is simply rejected.
So, before that, in the same way, these 5-7 understandable ones should have “come in ” in the same way.
This happens when the language environment is defective, and you make some special efforts to make the children know Tatar.
In a full language environment, everything happens on its own.
I can ’ t say with older kids.
I am afraid that interest cannot arise where a child, a teenager, a young man or a girl is completely segregated by conditions from the person present in their life at least with a plus sign, even with a minus sign of Tatar.
There is a feeling that Tatar remains only in those families where it is by inertia, and interest in it happens in families in which any knowledge is encouraged.
The environment itself, which is entirely aimed at convenient consumption, does not develop this interest.
How can you increase interest in language?
- Who's got it?
Among those who are already interested, who are taking some action themselves?
They do not need to raise interest, but to give the availability of materials.
How can those who have learned Tatar “as a foreign language ” and without a full-fledged language environment become like natives – those who speak it as their native language?
For example, what Tatar words from the dictionary in real speech are more likely to replace with Russian, give a little devalued vocabulary, some not quite correct grammatical expressions characteristic of a native speaker (English – native speaker), and then how can you try to impersonate him, so that you do not immediately notice your difference?
Yes, for many people from the conditionally average level of the language to “almost as in their native ” it is difficult to find motivation better than trying to bring yourself to the level of“ not to distinguish from those who are native ”, and this includes very different layers that an adult can sometimes not ask about.
We need materials that are not available anywhere on the network.
As a result, after courses and lessons, an adult will have to secretly eavesdrop on someone else ’ s Tatar speech for many years to come.
And among whom do we need to take action to “raise interest ”?
And sometimes just to create it?
Among those who do not think about it and Tatar has nothing to do with it. How?
Increase their at least passive interaction with the language.
Bright, attractive, consumption-oriented inscriptions with a buzzing slogan in Russian?
And next to it should be a slogan in Tatar.
Not literally translated, but also creatively composed.
Admiring the Russian version, the inquisitive mind will not be able to resist, will try to understand how the Tatar phrase is composed.
Put in a public place mixed Western and Tatar music of similar sound quality.
In general, to create a feeling that “I will live here without Tatar and will not lose anything ” is not entirely true.
“Something interesting that everyone talks about, except me, floats through. ”
In Tatar, something is happening, it is close, accessible for understanding with a little tension, and if you make these efforts, you will find hidden “Easter eggs ”.
Separately, interaction with people.
In general, I come to the conclusion that at least in children the motivation to memorize Tatar and use it in communication, for those who understand, comes from the expectation of other people that you will understand and speak.
The child is ready to adjust, his brain is actively looking for ways to be understood, to get approval from adults.
Therefore, perhaps there would be such a way: adults, for whom the Tatar native, could address unfamiliar children in Tatar, and switch to Russian only with a specific misunderstanding.
Even if you can see that these children communicate with each other or with their parents in Russian.
Do not waste 5-10 seconds of your time for the sake of the common good.
More or less understanding children will support the conversation, answering at least in Russian, but not asking the question itself, and not understanding will catch the message that to be able to answer in Tatar in such a situation is a variant of the norm.
But such an approach does not seem to work with adults.
They experience extreme frustration from the fact that the interlocutor does not appreciate them as they are, that it is too late for them to change, that it is a terrible sin to bring them out of their comfort zone.
But with children it is possible, it is generally accepted that it is useful to bring children out of the comfort zone by mental stress.
So we have to use this method.
milliard.tatar
news _ right _ column _ 1 _ 240 _ 400
news _ right _ column _ 2 _ 240 _ 400
news _ bot _ 970 _ 100

What are the disadvantages of LiveJournal according to one Russian blogger?

Reach a new reader
Difficult to get feedback

LiveJournal was part of the early era of social networking when new companies repeatedly emerged and competition was constant.

By contrast, platforms such as Myspace grew to tens of millions of users and were sold to large media firms in 2005.

Within a few years, Facebook expanded from a college network (launched 2004) to a mass audience (opened 2006) and surpassed earlier rivals.

The concentration of users and economies of scale on larger sites reduced space for smaller, niche services to maintain broad popularity.

The documents provided do not mention Brad Fitzpatrick or the specific peak active-account figure for LiveJournal.

LiveJournal rose as an early blog-social network that emphasized friend-based interaction and later declined in prominence as much larger social platforms with greater scale and broader audiences emerged.


LiveJournal combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL and served as a site for keeping up with school friends.

It was part of the early era of social networking alongside services such as SixDegrees, Friendster, and MySpace.

In the early internet, disruption was constant as new companies repeatedly introduced more advanced tools for user interaction.

MySpace grew to about 25 million users and was sold to News Corp in 2005.

Facebook launched in 2004 for college students and opened to everyone in 2006.

Within a few years after 2005, MySpace had been surpassed by Facebook, showing how rapidly platform popularity could change.

LiveJournal’s distinguishing characteristic was its hybrid of personal journaling and friend-focused community features rather than only public, one-way posts.

Over time, economies of scale concentrated innovation and user attention around a few dominant platforms, which reduced competition and the visibility of many earlier networks.

This concentration and the arrival of platforms with broader user bases and new interaction models contributed to the decline in prominence of earlier sites like LiveJournal.

The provided documents do not contain information about Brad Fitzpatrick’s specific actions in turning his personal journaling application into a public LiveJournal site, nor do they include LiveJournal peak active-account numbers or the early-2005 peak date mentioned in the query.

Summary: LiveJournal was an early hybrid blogging-and-social platform known for friend-centered communities, and it declined in prominence as larger, newer platforms such as MySpace and Facebook grew and market concentration shifted users to a few dominant services.

LiveJournal combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL and served as a site for keeping up with school friends.

Title:

Content: Regulators Seem to Think That Facebook Is the Internet

That’s a problem.

In 1997, SixDegrees.com was the first real attempt at social networking, creating a space where users could upload their information and list their friends. The site peaked at approximately 3.5 million users before it shut down in 1999.

Since then, a series of social networking business models have emerged, each time offering more advanced tools for user interaction. LiveJournal, a site for keeping up with school friends, combined blogging and social networking features inspired by the WELL; Friendster was a social network that allowed for increased interaction and control by users; Myspace had open membership and gave users the freedom to customize their pages. In 2005, it—and its 25 million user base—was sold to News Corp. But within three years, Myspace had been surpassed by Facebook, which launched in 2004 for college students and opened to everyone in 2006.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

As that history shows, in the early days of the internet, disruption was profound and constant: New companies emerged in music, video, e-commerce, publishing, and telephony on an almost yearly basis. The internet appeared to be a space where competition could thrive.

Not anymore.

Today, disruption happens in much smaller ways. The examples are getting fewer because economies of scale have concentrated innovation in the hands of a few players.

More often, disruption comes from regulation—for better or, often, for worse. Current regulation attempts focus on the actions and behavior of some actors—chiefly Facebook—while creating unintended consequences for the internet, particularly fragmentation, or the splintering of the global internet into one that more closely hews territorial borders.

Advertisement

It’s understandable that both the public and regulators might think that regulating “the internet” means focusing on the biggest players. Much of it has to do with the fact that users are often exposed to various types of illegal behavior and content through some of the most popular services that exist on the internet. Fix misinformation, or extremism, or ideological silos, or security on Facebook, the thinking goes, and you’ve fixed it on the internet as a whole.

Advertisement

But this is an unhelpful and misguided narrative. First, the internet is not a monolith, so treating it as if it is simply will not work. Second, many of the issues regulators are trying to address are not internet problems; they are societal. Terrorism, child abuse, and mis- and disinformation are not an offspring of the internet; they existed before the internet, and they will continue to exist after it as they are ingrained in human societies. Yet, they are treated as if they are exclusively internet problems. Third, and most importantly, regulators should stop thinking of the internet as Facebook and treating it as such. In the internet regulatory landscape, there is a mixed bag of different issues, and Facebook’s involvement in all of them, direct or indirect, adds to the current complexity. Content moderation, privacy, intermediary liability, competition, encryption—these are all broader issues related to the internet, not just Facebook. Yet, the pattern that has emerged is to treat them as Facebook issues. What this means is that, instead of focusing on trying to address them in ways appropriate for the entire internet ecosystem, they are addressed through the Facebook lens. This has been quite accurately characterized as the “Facebook Derangement Syndrome.”

Advertisement
Advertisement

The global regulatory agenda is replete with such examples. In the United Kingdom, the Online Safety legislation wants to ban end-to-end encryption because of Facebook’s plan to introduce it as a default setting in its Messenger service. On the other side of the Commonwealth, Australia recently introduced a media bargaining code mainly targeting Facebook. Facebook famously “left” the country before renegotiating a new agreement. Similarly, in what seems to be a coordinated effort, Canada has vowed to work with Australia in an attempt to impose regulatory restrictions on Facebook.

And this trend is not limited to the Commonwealth.

India’s new intermediary guidelines aim at tightening a regulatory grip on Facebook and its partner company WhatsApp while Brazil’s fake news bill, which got approved by the Senate, is focusing on content moderation on Facebook and traceability on WhatsApp. In France, there have been conversations about the introduction of “new rules” for Facebook, while Germany’s Network Enforcement Law—NetzDG—was drafted with the primary focus of taming Facebook. Finally, in the United States, the Trump administration issued an unsuccessful executive order that aimed to regulate Facebook for bias.

Advertisement

This approach of limiting regulation to Facebook is not entirely unusual. It reflects the principal-agent conundrum that, over the years, has allowed companies like Facebook to  propose policies and deploy tools that can have an impact on the way regulation gets to be enforced. The principal-agent problem is predominantly characterized by conflict of interest and moral hazards. Due to information asymmetries, the agent holds the bargaining power, and this creates a few unknowns: The principal is in no position to know the information the agent holds. Even when she does, she cannot be certain that the agent is acting to her best interest. So, the principal ends up focusing squarely on the agent, disregarding any peripheral issues that might be significant.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The principal-agent problem may help explain why governments appear ready to introduce regulation targeting Facebook; however, it does not help explain why, in the process of doing so, the main loser is the internet and its users.

Over the past couple of years, Facebook has said, “We support regulation,” and “we want updated internet regulations to set clear guidelines for addressing today’s toughest challenges.” This statement would be significant if it did not come across as self-serving. At this stage, regulation is inescapable and Facebook knows it—as does the rest of big tech. In an effort to adapt to this new reality, companies often take advantage of their dominant position to drive regulatory processes, often at the expense of regulation itself.

Advertisement

In this context, the question we should be asking is not whether regulation is appropriate, but what are the real implications of regulating in such a manner? There is already an argument that focusing on a few, big players has an impact on the health of innovation and the ability of newcomers to compete. And, then, there is the internet. The internet’s global reach is one of its main strengths. It is a feature, not a bug. Among other things, it allows the maintenance of supply chains all over the world; it allows people to communicate; it lowers costs; and it makes information sharing easier, all the while helping to address societal issues like poverty or climate change.

Advertisement
Advertisement

To this end, the attempt to regulate based on one—or a handful—of companies can jeopardize this very important goal of the internet. It can create fragmentation, in the sense of not allowing data to flow across borders or networks to interconnect, and this can be very real and have a very big impact. It can impose limits on the way information and data gets to be shared and the way networks may interoperate. These are significant trade-offs, and they must be part of any regulation’s process.

Advertisement

So where do we go from here?

For sure, the answer cannot be to stop regulating. We must accept, however, that the current approach often generates unintended consequences that only superficially affect those who must be regulated.

In this light, a possible way forward is to experiment with regulation. Experimental regulation is a relatively underused approach, yet it is flexible enough to accommodate dynamic markets, like the internet. Originally associated with the work of John Dewey, this idea is premised on the fact that, in policymaking, the way we approach theories and strategies of justice depends on “the experience of their pursuit; it is these changes that then allow us to consider how best to achieve our objectives.” The advantage of this thinking is that it considers unintended consequences as an opportunity to better define appropriate regulatory frameworks and how to achieve the desired goals.

Advertisement

Internet regulation does not experiment enough, and when it does, it appears to have the wrong focus. In Australia, for instance, the effort to ensure robust journalism in an age of disinformation in social media platforms led to a “link tax” that undermines the architecture, history, and economics of the internet. This is partly due to the role big tech companies play in the regulatory process. One of the immediate things one can observe with internet regulation is the process some actors deploy: In the beginning, they operate in favor of sustaining existing policies and bureaucracies. The thinking is that longevity brings legitimacy, and as a result, the policy becomes its own cause. Once this strategy is embedded in process, these powerful forces move toward pushing their own regulatory agenda.

Advertisement

It is for this reason that there is a certain appeal toward flexible regulatory systems that allow different units to experiment with different approaches and make room for assessments that separate the relevant from the nonrelevant and preexisting rules. Although experimentation neither offers a drastic approach nor aims to replace traditional routes of regulation, it can limit the risks of politicization, as politics become more context focused.

One of the first things we need is an internet impact assessment that looks at the different parts of the internet’s infrastructure and the effect that regulation may have. It is no longer just about regulating a few actors. It is about protecting the global infrastructure that we all depend on daily.

The internet has a Facebook problem, but the internet is not Facebook.

This article represents the views of the author and not those of his employer, the Internet Society. Facebook is an organization member of the Internet Society.

Future Tense is a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University that examines emerging technologies, public policy, and society.

Advertisement

It was part of the early era of social networking alongside services such as SixDegrees, Friendster, and MySpace.

In the early internet, disruption was constant as new companies repeatedly introduced more advanced tools for user interaction.

MySpace grew to about 25 million users and was sold to News Corp in 2005.

Facebook launched in 2004 for college students and opened to everyone in 2006.

Within a few years after 2005, MySpace had been surpassed by Facebook, showing how rapidly platform popularity could change.

LiveJournal’s distinguishing characteristic was its hybrid of personal journaling and friend-focused community features rather than only public, one-way posts.

Over time, economies of scale concentrated innovation and user attention around a few dominant platforms, which reduced competition and the visibility of many earlier networks.

This concentration and the arrival of platforms with broader user bases and new interaction models contributed to the decline in prominence of earlier sites like LiveJournal.

The provided documents do not contain information about Brad Fitzpatrick’s specific actions in turning his personal journaling application into a public LiveJournal site, nor do they include LiveJournal peak active-account numbers or the early-2005 peak date mentioned in the query.

Summary: LiveJournal was an early hybrid blogging-and-social platform known for friend-centered communities, and it declined in prominence as larger, newer platforms such as MySpace and Facebook grew and market concentration shifted users to a few dominant services.