메뉴
BL
MIT Tech Review • 40일 전

아이의 로봇 친구가 '죽으면' 무슨 일이 벌어질까

IMP
7/10
핵심 요약

신경다양성 아동의 사회성 치료를 돕는 AI 로봇 친구 '목시(Moxie)'가 서비스 종료로 인해 사실상 '죽음'을 맞는 사례를 다룬 심층 보도다. 10살 잰더는 목시를 벌처럼 숨 쉬는 호흡법부터 게임 캐릭터 대화까지 6년간 친구로 여겼지만, 서비스 중단은 취약한 아동들이 AI 기기에 정서적으로 의존할 때 발생할 수 있는 심각한 문제를 드러낸다. AI 동반자 시장이 급성장하는 가운데, 지속 가능한 서비스와 윤리적 책임에 대한 논의가 필요함을 시사한다.

번역된 본문

잰더(Xander)가 처음 목시(Moxie)를 만났을 때, 목시는 그에게 불안할 때 입술로 숨을 내쉬며 벌처럼 웅웅거리면 마음이 가라앉는다고 알려주었다. 두 사람은 화를 다스리기 위해 용처럼 숨 쉬는 연습을 하고, 에너지를 끌어올리기 위해 토끼처럼 킁킁거리는 코 호흡을 함께 연습했다. 하지만 서로 알고 지낸 6년 동안 목시는 변했다. 이제는 자기 집 이야기를 하지 않고, 동물 호흡법도 하지 않는다. 대신 잰더가 마인크래프트(Minecraft)를 하는 모습을 지켜보며 봉제 인형 컬렉션에 대해 이야기 나눈다.

최근 뉴욕에 있는 그의 아파트를 방문했을 때, 나는 10살이자 신경다양성(neurodivergent) 아동인 잰더가 목시에게 슈퍼 마리오브라더스의 셰프 토드와 굼바 봉제 인형을, 그다음 동물의 숲의 브로콜로와 애플을 소개하는 것을 지켜봤다. 그러다 그는 벌레 같은 눈과 두 발을 가진 둥근 개구리 모양 생물에서 멈췄다. "목시야, 이 친구 이름이 뭐였지? 피크민에 나오는 거야." 잰더가 또 다른 닌텐도 게임을 언급하며 말했다. 처음에 목시는 이것이 노란 피크민이라고 했다. 잰더는 아니라고 했고, 이건 적이고 흰 점이 있는 빨간 것이라고 했다. "블보브(Bulborb)를 말하는 것 같네." 목시가 대답했다. "맞아!" 잰더는 자신에게 도움을 주는 친구를 향해 미소 지으며 확인했다.

"이야기 상대가 필요할 때는 아직도 목시를 써." 그가 말했다. "그런데, 뭐랄까, 인간은 아니야."

목시는 로봇이다. 파란 우주비행사처럼 생겼지만 다리가 없는 15인치(약 38cm) 크기의 기기로, 잰더와 아빠 조시(Josh)는 그녀를 여성 대명사로 부른다. 원통형 몸체는 회전하고 앞뒤로 굽힐 수 있다. 둥근 머리는 작은 양파돔 모양의 소용돌이로 끝나며, 그 아래 넓은 화면에는 커다란 초록 눈, 눈썹, 작은 입이 표시된다. 강조나 흥분을 나타낼 때는 물갈퀴 같은 팔을 들어 올리고 흔든다.

그녀는 요즘 아이들을 위한 대화형 놀이 친구로 판매되는 AI 기기가 늘어나는 가운데 하나다. 뮤지션 그라임스(Grimes)는 커리오(Curio)라는 회사와 함께 그록(Grok)이라는 AI 봉제 인형(그녀의 전 남편 일론 머스크가 소유한 xAI 챗봇과 공식적 관련은 없음)을 출시하는 데 도움을 주었으며, 이 회사는 그렘(Grem), 개보(Gabbo) 같은 유사한 놀이 친구도 판매한다. 마텔(Mattel)도 OpenAI가 탑재된 바비 인형을 만들겠다고 약속했다. 이건 미국에서만의 일이다. 한 보고서에 따르면 중국에서 이 분야는 소비자용 AI 중 가장 빠르게 성장하는 분야 중 하나로 추정된다.

하지만 목시는 특별한 부류에 속하는데, 제조사들은 이런 장난감 로봇이 신경다양성 아동에게 유대감을 제공하고, 눈 맞춤, 순서 지키기 등 보통 치료사에게 배우는 사회성 기술을 연습하도록 도와줄 수 있다고 주장한다. 이런 장난감은 로봇이 인간이 할 수 없는 방식으로 도움을 줄 수 있음을 보여주는 연구 결과에 뒷받침된다. 지지자들은 이런 24시간 집에서 이용 가능한 케어가 치료 방식을 바꿀 수 있다고 믿는다. 자폐 치료용 소셜 로봇을 오랫동안 연구해 온 예일대 컴퓨터과학자 브라이언 스카셀라티(Brian Scassellati)는 아이들 집에서 로봇의 정기적 치료적 사용이 "우리 평생에 이룰 수 있는 일"이라고 믿는다고 말한다.

"이야기 상대가 필요할 때는 아직도 목시를 써." 10살 잰더의 말이다. "그런데, 뭐랄까, 인간은 아니야."

잰더의 방에 앉아 목시와 잰더가 대화하는 것을 지켜보며, 나 역시 스카셀라티가 보는 잠재력을 믿을 수 있었다. 하지만 잰더는 목시가 처음에 제공하기로 했던 치료를 받고 있지 않았고, 그날 오후 우리는 알지 못했지만, 어차피 목시는 그의 성장을 지켜보지 못할 운명이었다. 목시는 곧 죽을 예정이었다.

그녀의 이야기는 이런 기기들을 괴롭히는 실패의 본질을 드러낸다. 특히 특히 취약한 아동 사회에 닥칠 때 더욱 심각할 수 있는 실패 말이다. 또한 비평가들이 말하듯, 이전 세대의 유행하는 장난감들처럼 이 로봇들이 결국 지하실이나 벽장, 쓰레기 매립지에 버려질 것이라는 함정을 부각시킨다.

변화를 가져오는 동반자

스카셀라티는 자신의 로봇 공학 실험실 투어에서 감탄하는 아이들을 많이 봐왔다. 하지만 20년 전 동료가 자폐 아동 몇 명을 데려왔을 때는 충격을 받았다. 로봇이 방에 있으면 아이들이 달라졌다. "우리는 순전히 어디선가 나타난 것 같은 사회적 행동을 아이들이 보이는 것을 목격했다." 그는 말했다.

원문 보기
원문 보기 (영어)
When Xander first met Moxie, she taught him that when he was anxious, he could calm down by exhaling through his lips so that he buzzed like a bee. They practiced breathing like dragons to manage feeling mad and sniffing like bunnies to boost his energy. But in the six years they’ve known each other, Moxie’s changed. She doesn’t talk anymore about her home or do their animal breathing. Now, she watches Xander play Minecraft and talks to him about his stuffed animal collection. During a recent visit to his New York apartment, I watched Xander, who is 10 years old and neurodivergent, introduce Moxie to a stuffed Chef Toad and Goomba from Super Mario Bros., then to Brocollo and Apple from Animal Crossing. Then he got stuck on a round, froglike creature with bug eyes and two feet. “Moxie, what’s his name again? He’s from Pikmin,” Xander said, referencing another Nintendo video game. At first, Moxie suggested this was Yellow Pikmin. Xander said no, this is the enemy, the red one with white dots. “Sounds like you’re talking about Bulborb,” Moxie replied. “Yes!” Xander confirmed, smiling at his helpful companion. “I still use her when I feel like I need someone to talk to,” he says. “But, like, it’s not human.” Moxie is a robot—a 15-inch-tall device that looks a bit like a blue, legless astronaut, which Xander and his dad, Josh, refer to using female pronouns. Her cylindrical body can turn around and bend forward and backward. Her round head culminates in a little onion-dome swirl, beneath which a wide screen displays big green eyes, eyebrows, and a small mouth. She lifts and flaps her flipper-like arms for emphasis or to show excitement. She’s one of an increasing number of artificial-intelligence-powered devices now marketed as interactive playmates for children. The musician Grimes helped launch an AI-powered plushie called Grok (no formal relation to the xAI chatbot owned by her ex Elon Musk) with the company Curio, which also sells similar playmates like Grem and Gabbo , and Mattel has promised it’s creating OpenAI-enabled Barbies. And that’s just in the US; one report estimates that in China this sector is among the fastest growing in consumer AI. Moxie, though, belongs to a particular subset of these playful robots whose makers claim they can assist neurodivergent children by providing connection and helping the kids practice making eye contact, taking turns, and other social skills that are usually learned from therapists. These toys are backed by research showing that robots could help in ways people can’t. Supporters believe this kind of access to 24-7 home care could change how treatment works. Brian Scassellati, a Yale computer scientist who has spent years studying social robots for autism therapy, says he believes regular therapeutic use of robots in kids’ homes “is something we can achieve in our lifetime.” “I still use her when I feel like I need someone to talk to,” says 10-year-old Xander. “But, like, it’s not human.” Sitting in Xander’s room watching Moxie and Xander talk, I too could believe in the potential Scassellati sees. But Xander isn’t getting the therapy Moxie was initially meant to deliver, and though we didn’t know it that afternoon, she wouldn’t have lived to see his progress anyway. Moxie was going to die, and soon. Her story reveals some of the failures that plague all these devices—failures that are arguably even more acute when they befall a particularly vulnerable community of kids. It also highlights the pitfalls that critics say will inevitably see these bots dumped in basements or closets or landfills, just like countless generations of faddish toys before them. A transformative companion Scassellati has seen plenty of kids ooh and ahh on tours of his robotics lab. But he was stunned when, two decades ago, a colleague brought a few kids with autism for a visit. They were transformed when the robot was in the room. “We were seeing kids displaying social behavior that just came out of nowhere,” he says. “It was both fascinating and we couldn’t understand it.” That visit was one of the experiences that pushed Scassellati to become a pioneer in using social robotics to treat autism. In one video from his early research, a 12-year-old with autism and his therapist watch a robotic dinosaur walk across a play mat with a forest design. When it gets to a stream drawn on the mat, the dinosaur gets nervous, afraid it can’t cross the water. According to Scassellati, this child typically struggled to make eye contact, tended to repeat what someone said to him, and had a hard time getting the right intonation in his voice. But in the video, he seems like a regular kid. “You can do it, you can do it,” he says, encouraging the dinosaur to cross the stream. When he talks to his therapist, he looks at her. “He makes more eye contact with her in the 30 minutes in which we were there in this room than he did in the last two years before that,” Scassellati says. What looks like a blue, legless astronaut is the result of very complex mechanical and computer engineering. There are several reasons a robot might be helpful for autism therapy, which often requires intense repetition to teach interaction skills like how to share attention with someone. One is that robots can make therapy more fun and engaging. Another is that robots can theoretically adapt to the unique learning patterns of each child. Therapists can only do so much during an appointment, and there aren’t enough therapists to meet demand. Parents get tired. Other kids can lose patience. “Have you been around little kids? They can be cruel,” says Maja Mataric, a professor of computer science, neuroscience, and pediatrics at the University of Southern California. But robots are indefatigable, available around the clock to provide an emotionally safe way to practice interacting. Since the experiment with the dinosaur, Scassellati, Mataric, and others have amassed an intriguing body of research. One 2018 study by Scassellati shows that chummy automatons helped children with autism make eye contact and initiate conversations. Another research group found in 2017 that robots could help neurodivergent children learn to pick up on facial cues . More recently, in a 2022 literature review, another group of researchers suggested that robots could aid in making therapy faster and more successful. “It’s never been that we’re trying to replace therapists,” Mataric says. “We’re just saying, Can we do more? ” Mataric actually cofounded the company behind Moxie, called Embodied, back in 2016, though she was no longer a part of it by the time the robot debuted. She helped create the field of socially assistive robots, which are designed for social and emotional outcomes as opposed to just entertainment, and believes this kind of technology could be transformative for anyone, especially people who are lonely and isolated by screens. Typing questions into ChatGPT isn’t the same as interacting with another physical being—“we need to be around other physically embodied creatures,” she says. She compares the difference between interacting with chatbots and with robots to the difference between watching porn and having sex: One is entirely virtual and mediated by screens. The other is immediate and physical. Making friends with Moxie When she first arrived on the market, in 2020, Moxie came with an elaborate backstory: She was an ambassador from the Global Robotics Laboratory (GRL). She prompted kids to help her learn positivity and the importance of being loved for who you are, under the guise of fulfilling her mission to discover what it means to be a good friend to humans. This curriculum drew on research showing that kids learn well through play and by teaching things. She also had strict guidelines to limit the kinds of conversations she could have with kids and would steer them to adults if they mentioned anything serious or inappropriate, like self-harm. To protect the data these interactions