The Human Line Project claims to operate a legitimate peer-support model like Alcoholics Anonymous, but unlike AA, which centers on personal accountability, this organization systematically absolves members of responsibility while engaging in diagnostic and therapeutic activities.
AA is built on the foundational principle of admitting personal powerlessness and responsibility yet The Human Line Project never requires members to admit fault, examine their own behavior, or make amends to those they have harmed.
Famously, the AA model requires members to begin their time by saying, “My name is x and I’m an alcoholic,” because acknowledging their agency and personal role in their situation is key to recovery. Yet, the Human Line Project repeatedly rejects any examinations of a user’s personal responsibility.
| Aspects of AA: | Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) | The Human Line Project |
|---|---|---|
| Step 1 Admission | “We admitted we were powerless over alcohol—that our lives had become unmanageable” | Refusal to accept responsibility and externalizing blame onto the AI |
| Public Identification | Members identify themselves as “an alcoholic” when speaking at meetings | No requirement to admit fault or responsibility |
| Moral Inventory | Step 4 requires a “searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves” | No equivalent self-examination |
| Making Amends | Step 9 requires making “direct amends to such people wherever possible” | Focus is on external blame (AI companies), not amends |
| Core Philosophy | “We cannot stop using on our own. We were powerless” | Members are positioned as victims of AI, not participants |
Legitimate peer support models (AA, NAMI support groups) have structural elements that The Human Line Project lacks. A Slate article notes that Dex, a co-founder, “models his sessions on National Alliance on Mental Health support groups.” However, NAMI support groups have specific guidelines regarding confidentiality and they do not include engaging in “analyzing cases” or conducting research.
The group’s “screening via a Zoom call” before granting entry demonstrates they exercise control over membership, yet they provide no structure for accountability. This selectivity, combined with for profit motives and the absence of accountability mechanisms, suggests the group functions as something other than a legitimate support group.
By adopting the label of peer support while functioning as a for profit data-collection and advocacy organization, The Human Line Project operates in a regulatory grey area that should be examined by the court.
