The Many Faces of Indeterminacy in Interactive Deadbots

Journal Article (2026)
Author(s)

Atay Kozlovski (TU Delft - Information and Communication Technology)

Edina Harbinja (University of Birmingham)

Roel Dobbe (TU Delft - Information and Communication Technology)

Research Group
Information and Communication Technology
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-026-01089-2 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2026
Language
English
Research Group
Information and Communication Technology
Journal title
Philosophy and Technology
Issue number
2
Volume number
39
Article number
74
Downloads counter
5
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Advances in generative AI have given rise to a growing industry centred on interactive representations of deceased individuals. Within this emerging “digital afterlife industry”, interactive deadbots (IDBs) are presented as hyper-realistic avatars that use a person’s likeness, voice, and personal data to simulate conversational interactions with them. Rapidly moving from a niche experiment to a mainstream phenomenon, IDBs are poised to reshape the ethical, social, legal, and governance landscapes surrounding death, mourning, and digital legacy. This paper examines the disruptive nature of IDB technology through a multidisciplinary lens, using the concept of indeterminacy as its guiding analytical framework and a novel way to conceptualise the unstable field. Rather than advancing a unified understanding of indeterminacy, we introduce a structured analytical map and provisional taxonomy that distinguishes technological, social, philosophical, legal, and regulatory manifestations of indeterminacy in IDBs. By offering a tentative and necessarily selective map of this fluid and nascent field, we explore how indeterminacy and IDBs intersect. The paper examines how IDBs amplify existing forms of indeterminacy and how indeterminacy itself shapes the development and use of these systems across five domains: technological, social, philosophical, legal, and regulatory.