She's an operating system. The idea of monogamy, fidelity and being exclusive with someone doesn't make the sense that it makes to humans who have been socialised to be monogamous and faithful. As time went on, and she grew, she understood the complexities of loving more than one person and that's why she admitted that she had considered how to broach this with him. It isn't polyamory but it does infer that without socialization, we might not fall into monogamy as naturally as some think we would.
The film, in my opinion, was saying that people who have online relationships are either flawed or sheltered. The sheltered people will eventually grow and move on but those who aren't sheltered but are flawed will remain that way unless they acknowledge that they are messed up and work on it. So if you're an American in a online relationship with a shepherd's daughter from Kazakhstan, it's you that's fucked up, not her. She'll move on from you and have "real" relationships whereas you've moved backwards because you can't handle reality and proper relationships and the emotions that go with them. It just seemed to be wholly critical of online, long distance relationships. It was like it was saying "they might seem really real, but it isn't, and even she'll move on eventually when she, the sheltered individual, realises that it's all pretend".