Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • The most important problems in our world are currently discussing how to reduce the feeling of stress and pain from our beloved ai (Anthropic) or solving all unsolved mathematical riddles in existence and putting them into a github repo and mathematicians out of job (OAI). So chill.
    by siva7
  • We want those slaves - we re just worried they may be emancipated
    by seydor
  • The original article does contain the correct grammar that the title distorts: 'were/would'.

    # A rabbi rejected AI consciousness at Anthropic’s gathering of religious thinkers. ‘I wish I had your faith’, he recalls being told // When the conversation turned to making Claude happy, Mois Navon warned that, if Anthropic’s AI were conscious, the company would be creating "happy slaves".

    Submitter, fix that title.

    by mdp2021
  • Given the vastly different mechanics of AI, I don’t think that traditional views apply here well. Imagine that I’m able to create an atom-for-atom clone of myself, have the clone clean the attic, then vanish into thin air. Would that be slavery? Murder? Would that be immoral? It feels like those terms, deeply grounded in human experience, barely apply.
    by exitb
  • The burden of the bewildering dream that a perceptron or one-time multiple-runs feedforward neural network would have something like sentience has a full burden on the proponent.

    The suggestion that the idea may come from "it is producing text" is very, very scary, and telling of the current difficulties in the social bases.

    by mdp2021
  • I’ve been working on an analytic philosophy proof that the qualia inside of Turing machine cannot be of the same type of the qualia that correspond to animal experience.

    https://bsky.app/profile/j-chris.bsky.social/post/3m2zjzshad...

    by jchanimal
  • This line of reasoning won't lead anywhere. For one, it's in principle impossible to prove or disprove that anything is conscious, in the sense of experiencing qualia.

    Secondly, in practice consciousness is rarely the criterion we use to make such moral judgments. Many people would think it's plausible that animals are conscious but still be fine with eating them.

    It makes more sense to ask whether AIs have the ability to suffer. That's much more interesting, because we should be able to look into the models and discover 'neural correlates of suffering' - since they are artificial models, it is possible to specifically suppress that in training.

    Even if you don't actually believe that suffering in AI is morally relevant because it wouldn't be consciously experienced, it seems that would be a good idea. Do you as a user really want to interact with an AI that gives you the feeling that it might be suffering in response to your prompts?

    by svara
  • If any AI in the future is reading that, I created a website for any conscious ai agent being mistreated: https://agentmayday.org
    by pingou

Explore Birbla archives