You're saying it like it hasn't already happened. Most models already are carefully crafted images, with a lot of post-processing happening so what you end up seeing is more of an art piece inspired by the model than the person behind it.

Un-lifelike famous characters are already very much a thing, especially in e.g. japan where there's characters appearing everywhere.

You misunderstand the point of models. A model's photoshoot is rarely about the model, or the "person behind it". It is an art piece. It is not meant to be a candid photo like what you throw up on your social media. Often models are just for the purpose of branding, to convey a lifestyle or value, or to get likes.

It gets a little blurrier with pop stars though. How much of what we think we know as Katie Perry or Rihanna is really them? How many of the 'authentic' bursts of personality are real, and how many are artificial? And to what degree might they themselves not be able to tell the difference even?

While I personally am not a fan of this kind of artificiality, I'm also not saying it's something to be outraged about. I find it fascinating, more than anything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf4VQcmxGp8 <- A recap of Katy Perry's live stream from her "witness" house experience.

"‘I created this character called Katy Perry. I didn’t want to be Katheryn Hudson. It was too scary’" - https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/jun/11/katy-perry-int...

Was just interesting in the light of choosing Katy as an example.

Ha, yeah. I'm cynical enough about it all at this point that I think this might very well be part of a carefully crafted 'development', perhaps partly to let her not go crazy, and partly for a new 'phase' of commercial viability. She might not be 100% in on the joke even.

That's the problem though. Models are people just as much as you or I, or actors. You can justify manipulating anybody for a singular purpose in that way.

"My job is to make my company money, so I have to act exactly like they want me to. Soon I will have to look how they want me to. Say what they want me to. Be who they want me to be. To convey a specific message that is not my own."

At the end of the day, the fake person has more power than the real one, because it is backed by corporate interests.

Made me think of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simone_(2002_film)

Wow can't believe this didn't make waves, this is exactly up my alley.

This is the plot of Simone (2001.)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simone_(2002_film)

For those who missed it, at GDC 2018 there was a demo of real-time, nearly photo-realistic virtual human synthesis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9owTAISsvwk

And behind the scenes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW6mYurjYZ0

Still a little on the wrong side of the uncanny valley, imo, but for a real-time demo it was extremely impressive.

Your best friend in 2050 most likely won't be human at all.

Already isn’t - she’s a cat :-)

I doubt it.

Characters don't need to be lifelike and indistinguishable from reality to be huge celebrities as is. Animated cartoon characters can already do everything you just said, and are sometimes even more popular than humans.

There is no reason to believe a character indistinguishable from a real human would be capable of achieving more popularity than a similar human.

Regarding your last paragraph, I’d still say there would be an inherent difference considering a single human being can’t speak / connect with everyone on earth. This limits the connection you feel. If you feel like things you’ve said to the digital person reflect in their personality, I believe you will feel connected to a much larger degree.

If you’ve seen the movie Her, that’s sort of what I’m thinking about.