Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Emerging Tech
  3. News

An AI company paid humans to climax with a bot. It now claims big stress and focus wins.

The Masturbation Lab Report claims that 37% of adults are open to AI-guided masturbation and that the method actually yields big wins.

Add as a preferred source on Google
Back, Body Part, Person
Pexels / Gioele Fazzeri

I recently had a chat with a couple of college-going students, and during my interaction, I discovered some fascinating ways students are using AI these days. From helping with research to deploying it as a last-minute cheating tool, the spectrum is wide, but what really piqued my interest was when one of them admitted to occasionally asking ChatGPT to roleplay as her boyfriend. Now, the trend is not exactly brand new or shocking.

There is a whole community out there that finds a sense of companionship or relief in virtual characters that act as a companion, partner, wife, friend, mentor, or whatever it is that they are seeking. The idea is pretty controversial, but it’s here to stay. Joi AI, a company that offers AI companions as a service, recently conducted an experiment to find out if erotic sessions guided by an AI bot can be as rewarding as the usual act of self-pleasuring using conventional means such as pornography or fantasy thoughts.

Recommended Videos

The company paid $2,000 per month to the ten “Masturbation Consultants” selected from a pool of over 150,000 applicants. The objective of the study was to understand whether self-pleasure can become an AI-guided wellness ritual. According to the company, it can. The company claims the satisfaction levels reported by participants during AI-bot-guided sessions stand at 7.22 on a scale of 1-10, which falls in the same bracket as using toys (7.6), watching porn (7.31), and fantasising about the act or a person (7.27).

Notably, Joi AI claims that “37% of adults are open to AI-guided masturbation, or are already practising it.” Additionally, it claims that stress levels went down by 25% after the AI-guided self-pleasuring sessions, focus went up by 17%, and participants also reported a 19% decline in levels of mental restlessness. Broadly, the company wants to take the taboo out of self-pleasure using a new tool: erotic AI companions.

AI‑lationships are here.

The company goes a step further and claims that after the sessions, not only did the human subjects feel relief and creative inspiration, but they also felt a 44% reduction in cravings for vices like nicotine, alcohol, junk food, and doomscrolling. Now, that’s a tall claim, and there is no scientific evidence to prove that having an orgasm can actually suppress the aforementioned cravings.

Just in case you’re feeling curious, Joi AI lets you access the raunchy AI companion service at $3.99 per month, but more premium services, such as videos depicting an AI companion, will cost tokens purchased with real money. And what exactly is on the plate? “From official digital duplicates of real celebrities to custom characters fresh from your imagination, we make it easy to find love, sex, and romance without the hassle of dating,” says the company.

Joi AI claims the service offers relief from the usual drawbacks of IRL dating. Experts, however, differ. Across a series of conversations with sex therapists and psychologists that I’ve had on this topic in the past couple of years, I’ve sensed caution, disgust, and uncertainty as the main themes. After all, when it starts affecting real social interactions and behavioral patterns, and humans start having babies with their virtual AI partners, something has definitely gone very, very wrong.

Nadeem Sarwar
Nadeem is the Managing Editor at Digital Trends.
Tiny robots could shrink weeks of heart infection treatment into a single day
Forget open-heart surgery, because these rice-sized robots take the express route to your heart.
heart being treated by tiny robot

Treating a heart infection is no walk in the park. Patients often spend weeks on IV antibiotics, and if that fails, open-heart surgery enters the picture. Johns Hopkins University engineers may have found a better way.

The team has developed magnetic “millirobots” that are about as wide as a pencil tip and roughly as long as a grain of rice. As detailed in their study published in Advanced Materials Technologies, the robots are designed to deliver medicine directly to infected heart tissue.

Read more
Meta goes toe-to-toe with the big boys as it launches Muse Wonder AI models
Illustration of Meta Muse Wonder AI model.

It's raining frontier AI models. Soon after Anthropic set alarm bells ringing with its Claude Fable model at the summit of AI peformance, OpenAI answered with GPT-6 Astra. Not one to be left behind, Google released Gemini 4 Argon. The race is now getting hotter as Meta enters the fray with two new AI models in the Muse series: Wonder and Wonder Full. Cheesy naming aside, these Meta AI models mean business, or at least that's what the benchmark figures suggest. More importantly, these AI models are already making their way to Muse users.

https://twitter.com/DigitalTrends/status/2109699549375988120

Read more
AI can’t tell if you’re gay or straight, but it thinks it knows what both look like
AI knows it shouldn't judge a face, but apparently, drawing one is a different story.
Emilia Clarke AI generated stock image. Gemini / Nano Banana is on the left

We've all been told not to judge a book by its cover, and you'd think AI would follow that rule, too. Ask an AI chatbot to guess someone's sexual orientation just by looking at their face, and it'll likely tell you that there's no reliable way to know. But what happens when you ask that same model to change someone's appearance to match a particular sexual orientation? Well, that's where things get uncomfortable.

A new study, accepted for presentation at the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, found that AI models from OpenAI and Google can be inconsistent when handling sensitive personal characteristics. They might refuse to make assumptions about someone based on their appearance, but when asked to generate those same assumptions visually, the results tell a very different story.

Read more