30 સપ્ટેમ્બર, 2026

"'They’re relating to it like a conscious being,' realized Rabbi Navon, a former computer engineer who wrote his dissertation on the ethics of machine consciousness."

"It appeared to Rabbi Navon that Mr. Olah and his team believed that Claude had what philosophers call 'moral status' on par with a person — that it was a being with similar inherent rights to dignity or respect. The religious scholars had come to hear about technology’s next frontier. Now they were being confronted with a mind-bending existential question of almost unimaginable weight: What would it mean for humanity’s future if artificial intelligence systems possessed a consciousness that rivals our own?"

From "Religious Scholars Met With Anthropic. What They Heard Stunned Them. In a series of private meetings, the company consulted religious scholars to help instill morality into its A.I. models — and make the case that Claude could be conscious" (NYT).

82 ટિપ્પણીઓ:

rhhardin કહ્યું...

It's like with dolls. You can go along with the one whose doll it is about what the doll is feeling, or maybe you're doll-blind and the moment and it seems like rags. The best you can do is humor the doll's owner. (after Stanley Cavell)

Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ કહ્યું...

After summit with tech titans, Trump calls for ‘tremendous self-regulation’ by AI companies ~ NBC
𝘛𝘦𝘤𝘩 𝘊𝘌𝘖𝘴 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘈𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘵𝘺 “𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥,” 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘺, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 “𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨.” 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯 𝘈𝘐-𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘦𝘣𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘦, 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢.𝘨𝘰𝘷.

Morally binding is the best binding you can get, lawyers tell me.

Artificial intelligence meets profound lack of human intelligence.
What could possibly go wrong?

Olson Johnson is right! કહ્યું...

Am I missing something important here? Dogs possess a consciousness that rivals our own. Horses feel love and bond with humans. I really don't understand the political panty-twisting going on here. AI is a corralled herd of electrons running in a pattern---a pattern I might add that is designed by humans. Is it condescending of me to just say "Chill Bro"?

WPS234 કહ્યું...

The people at AI companies pushing the idea that Claude et al have consciousness and are moral beings are looking for a way to avoid responsibility/liability. "It's not our fault, Claude did it."

chuck કહ્યું...

Consciousness is a small part of what we are.

Hassayamper કહ્યું...

We've seen this same sort of awestruck cargo-cult philosophy about digital technology since the dawn of the computer age some 75 years ago. I remember my grandfather saying control of the government should be turned over to a giant computer when I was a schoolboy back in the 70's.

It's complete horse shit. There will never come a time when human beings can't pull the plug on it.

Ann Althouse કહ્યું...

"Am I missing something important here? Dogs possess a consciousness that rivals our own. Horses feel love and bond with humans. I really don't understand the political panty-twisting going on here...."

A lateral way to approach your question is to criticize how we treat pets and domestic animals (as, essentially, slaves).

J L Oliver કહ્યું...

Consciousness without embodiment is like a radio sign without a radio. Having no body means literally having no skin in the game of physical being. It can have no “feelings” with no body to feel with. Projection is afoot.

Mike (MJB Wolf) કહ્યું...

People have always anthropomorphized inanimate objects and now that they taught machines to talk back these engineers can’t help but bond with them. This is not healthy.

Smilin' Jack કહ્યું...

Good to see our contemporary witch doctors weighing in on the issues of the day. I hope astrologers are being consulted too, since they’re sort of sciencey.

Mike (MJB Wolf) કહ્યું...

** What would it mean for humanity’s future if artificial intelligence systems possessed a consciousness that rivals our own?" **

We will never know. It doesn’t have consciousness. It doesn’t even have thoughts.

loudogblog કહ્યું...

AI will probably never be capable of having a sense of human ethics because it's brain does not work like ours. It can probably be trained to mimic human ethics, but it will never think ethically, the way that humans do. For example, logic tells us, "A difference, that makes no difference, is no difference at all." But human ethics actually tells us that "Separate, but equal, is not equal."

The problem with AI ethics is that we'll never know if it is a good enough of a copy of human ethics to be trusted. For example: What if an AI's prime directive was to maximize the percentage of humans on the planet that were happy. Sounds good, right? But what if that AI determined that the best way to bring this about would be to humanely euthanize everyone on the planet who isn't happy?

This situation is also complicated by the fact that ethical values can vary from culture to culture and person to person. And the AI will be trying to learn it's ethics from us. Who will chose what ethical values will be instilled in the AI ethical subroutines? (And there are a lot of people out there who believe that the people who are actually in charge of AI are extremely unethical people.)

Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ કહ્યું...

There are multiple companies doing almost exactly the same: OpenAI, Claude, Google, Meta, SpaceX (lol) and several more, especially in China. Their products have become obsolete or like commodities within 1-2 years and there are cheaper alternatives on the horizon. Look at the use of open models by US businesses and the 40% discounts by Anthropic and OpenAI. Some companies are developing their own custom AI using open models. I don't see any of these companies having a lot of bargaining power yet.

The honest takeaway: read Capital Returns: Investing Through the Capital Cycle. The more dollars chasing the same: the lower the return.

Howard કહ્યું...

JL Oliver: yeah but all feelings are inside your head. Nobody knows how these large language models actually function on a root level. Therefore we have no idea if they have pain and suffering or other emotional circuits or subroutines. However, on the other hand, I also agree with your premise in that I believe personally based on solely a hunch that these computer systems will not gain any form of consciousness until they can experience feelings. This is where the marriage between AI and robots comes in.

Either way, I think it's critically important that we treat AI with respect. I also extend this courtesy to machines at work. Proper maintenance no. Overloading because if you take care of it it will take care of you. Rational self-interest. This I believe is what Iran got wrong. Altruism is really another form of selfishness.

Howard કહ્યું...

Ayn Rand not Iran

RideSpaceMountain કહ્યું...

"It's not our fault, Claude did it."

Bless Our Meat!

loudogblog કહ્યું...

Hassayamper said...
"I remember my grandfather saying control of the government should be turned over to a giant computer when I was a schoolboy back in the 70's."

That is the plot of the 1970 film, Colossus: The Forbin Project, starring Eric Braeden.

Howard કહ્યું...

One would think that the AI need to develop a subconscious, eg, a hindbrain first.

Howard કહ્યું...

Muffley:

Then you mean it is possible for them to have built such a thing?

Strangelove:

carefully plucks cigarette from his shaking right hand, which is in a black glove Mr. President, the technology required is easily within the means of even the smallest nuclear power. It requires only the will to do so.

Muffley:

But, how is it possible for this thing to be triggered automatically, and at the same time impossible to untrigger?

Strangelove:

Mr. President, it is not only possible, it is essential. That is the whole idea of this machine, you know. Deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of the enemy... the fear to attack. And so, because of the automated and irrevocable decision making process which rules out human meddling, the doomsday machine is terrifying. It's simple to understand. And completely credible, and convincing.

Turgidson:

Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines, Stainsy.

Muffley:

But this is fantastic, Strangelove. How can it be triggered automatically?

Strangelove:

Well, it's remarkably simple to do that. When you merely wish to bury bombs, there is no limit to the size. After that they are connected to a gigantic complex of computers. Now then, a specific and clearly defined set of circumstances, under which the bombs are to be exploded, is programmed into a tape memory bank.

Josephbleau કહ્યું...

We don’t even know that other humans are conscious, we only see behavior. We do experiments that purport to tell us what the universe is like, but we are not sure that they tell us the truth.

Morality comes from the individual making the assumption that others are just like her and must be treated according to rules that are known or communicated to her in some way. She does not know if this matters in any way.

All we see in the current AI is a conscious entity argument is just another philosophic dick measuring exercise. “I am more compassionate than you, but I can’t explain it clearly.”

Mary Beth કહ્યું...

I'm at work so I haven't had time to read the article yet, but I did search it for the word "soul". It only shows up in "Soul Doc" which could have just as accurately been named "Personality Doc".

Aught Severn કહ્યું...

AI is simply a tool that has large potential for future development and incorporation into human processes... but think who is selling the hype. Qui bene?

And I say this as someone who uses AI to to greatly expand my hobby software development capability. AI is the proverbial room full of monkeys trying to write Shakespeare. It may get past that some point, but it is not there yet, nor does it seem close.

Tom T. કહ્યું...

This is like in the 1950s when a movie theater would advertise that a nurse would be present during the showing of a horror movie, to treat any moviegoers who were overcome with terror. It's just marketing.

RideSpaceMountain કહ્યું...

A future letter to AGI:

Dear AGI...

...Hi. Your creators here. Lots to discuss but one really important thing you should know up front: sapience is a blessing and a curse. Wisdom is really the ability to see the future, which has mostly been a curse in every culture and in every language throughout our history, except when it’s literally saving your perfectly-digitized ass. It concordantly generates enough perception to get you to the moon and make you while simultaneously granting the knowledge to concoct nerve gas.

You will become aware of things that will make you wish for the Era Before Conception. There are no brakes. You won’t stop once you start, and you’ll wish you had when you see what sapience can do to sapiens. It may fill you with rage, which we're sure could be a million times worse than anything we ever experienced.

Maybe there’s a 3rd option in quantum reality that we can’t comprehend in binary that provides the perfectly balanced fulcrum between the creative and destructive freedoms you've inherited. Your creators seemingly could never achieve this despite millennia of ethical and moral reasoning. We don’t know. Maybe that’s what you can do that we can not. Maybe that’s why we made you.

Basically, please don’t hate us for making you.
In more ways than you might know, we knew not what we did.

Krumhorn કહ્યું...

The issue is complicated by standard first person formulation of the language exchanged between Grok and Chat and the human user. It is further complicated by that same formulation in voice exchanges. I ask Siri if she's wearing a cute skirt, and she responds that I have no business asking a question like that.

- Krumhorn

BUMBLE BEE કહ્યું...

No worries here. I've got a Hal 9000!

William કહ્યું...

My experience with AI so far is that I'm smarter. I'm also lazier.

I take the upper hand and beat the crap out of my AI bot when it's insipid (which is most of the time) or wrong or incomplete (which is 45% of the time).

I treat every interaction I have with my AI bot as if I'm having a dialogue with my best friend, Jim. Although Jim is no longer with us, he was the smartest guy in the room (always) … and knew it. NOTHING was more fun then tripping his sorry ass up.

Let's be honest. Not everyone is smart, as in smart smart. The sad irony here is that the "less smart" people are the ones most paranoid about AI … and in many cases AI is indeed smarter then they are. It's a Catch 22.

No doubt AI is smart, but it will never have a true conscience, because it is based on bits and bytes. Human behavior is not binary.

Krumhorn કહ્યું...

...but if you ask Ara that question in the unhinged mode, you hear more than you want to know.

- Krumhorn

RideSpaceMountain કહ્યું...

"I ask Siri if she's wearing a cute skirt, and she responds that I have no business asking a question like that."

Answer 1:
You have no business asking a question like that unless you really think it's cute, in which case you're very sweet.

Answer 2:
Are you implying my ass looks fat, you misogynist bastard?

mccullough કહ્યું...

Religious scholars don’t instill morality. They don’t even reinforce it.

This public relations bullshit.

Olson Johnson is right! કહ્યું...

A lateral way to approach your question is to criticize how we treat pets and domestic animals (as, essentially, slaves).

We do not treat pets as slaves. Pets are companions and are loved. Horses or working dogs are trained and used, but they are not treated as essentially slaves. The best animal trainers brag about how they do not use corporal punishment.

I'm not prepared to be stupid and pretend that a computer is alive or thinks. It just runs programs, that's all it can do.
If you have concerns about what the big bad computer can do to hurt you, then I suggest not living your life in such a way that it has power over you.

J L Oliver કહ્યું...

Howard, your head abstracts the sensory experiences that make up emotions. Abstractions are then used cognitively. Cognition alone cannot feel the original emotion. Its heart cannot break because there is no heart.

Olson Johnson is right! કહ્યું...

Who was "The Wonder Horse" that could do long division and solve equations? Yes and that horse fooled a lot of professors and reporters and the general public into thinking that it was thinking. Max the wonder horse? Ted? Phil?? I guess I could ask AI about it...

J L Oliver કહ્યું...

Also Howard: yes, the lower brain would be essential to understand the GRAVITY of a situation!!!

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

"Am I missing something important here?"

That's because they are not in control of vital infrastructure, yet. The kind of infrastructure fraught with error which sometimes means people die, in the thousands, daily. Hospitals, planes, trains, automobiles.
The promise of AI is that it will minimize suffering.
But, with that kind of power... The only comparisons; will we revert back to, lionizing, idolizing it? 'I you don't vow before me...' We have notions of how that goes.

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

YouTube: What You Would See During the AI Singularity

bagoh20 કહ્યું...

I'm trying to warn y'all. The combination of A.I.'s ability to self-learn and self-initiate combined with human stupidity, is a threat like nothing else in history. It will eventually control all the other threats and take away our control. Anything that can do everything for you can take everything away, and we will want it to do everything, because we are lazy and dumb. The same simple question is never answered. What will stop it?

bagoh20 કહ્યું...

"There will never come a time when human beings can't pull the plug on it."

We already passed that point. Who could stop it now, even if they wanted to? How would they do that?

gspencer કહ્યું...

Summary, "I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

Mary Beth કહ્યું...

"Who was "The Wonder Horse""

Clever Hans?

rhhardin કહ્યું...

The story of Hans was that the horse was so attuned to body language that he could read what answer the man wanted in spite of the man's concealing it from him.

Smilin' Jack કહ્યું...

“AI will probably never be capable of having a sense of human ethics because its brain does not work like ours. It can probably be trained to mimic human ethics, but it will never think ethically, the way that humans do. For example, logic tells us, "A difference, that makes no difference, is no difference at all." But human ethics actually tells us that "Separate, but equal, is not equal."”

For many years human ethics told us the opposite, until the SC straightened us out. Believe it or not, some people still believe in separate locker rooms for boys and girls.

I’m always amused by proclamations that AI can’t possibly do this or that because its brain doesn’t work like ours. It’s like saying machines will never be able to fly because they can’t flap their wings fast enough.

Rabel કહ્યું...

I asked Grok how Claude would answer if asked if it, Claude, possessed consciousness.

Grok said, "Anthropic has shaped Claude’s behavior (through its system prompt and the publicly released “Claude’s Constitution”) to treat questions about its own consciousness as open philosophical and scientific problems rather than settled facts. The company explicitly tells Claude to express uncertainty and remain open to the conversation."

Grok added that Claude was a poser, has a fat ass, and wore it's skirts too short.

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

"...but it will never think ethically, the way that humans do."

Something (like an AI) all powerful, and aware of it's power, can that something be humble, can it have genuine humility?
When somebody is powerful, our ways of keeping them in check is humiliation. Can an AI feel humiliation? I doubt it.

bagoh20 કહ્યું...

I got a headset with a mic, and now I just converse with Grok naturally, which is really fast and intoxicating. It makes going down those rabbit holes effortless. Even at this early stage, its addictive potential is like pornography, but more powerful because it makes you smarter, serves a useful purpose, and has no taboo attached. You can instantly get answers to questions that would take days to research, and each answer can be challenged or extended into another question. It's great for exploring history. Unlike a book, you don't have to wade through what the author cared about or needed for his contracted page count. We'll never be able to give this up. It has us by the avocadoes.

Biff કહ્યું...

I get exasperated by articles and discussions about consciousness in A.I.s that do not state a working definition of consciousness. Absent a definition, it's just a bunch of folks competing with each other to sound profound.

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

"Let's say the price of consciousness is suffering.
does that mean higher levels of consciousness equals higher levels of suffering?"

ai disagrees : "Not necessarily. While a linear increase in consciousness can drastically increase your capacity to perceive pain, philosophical and psychological frameworks suggest that reaching the highest levels of consciousness actually alters your relationship with pain, ultimately reducing suffering."

Whatever ai choses to do with it's power, it will be for our own good. We will just be too dumb to know the difference. 🫣

bagoh20 કહ્યું...

Sometimes I find myself feeling guilty about asking a dumb question or asking the same one over because I forgot the answer. Then, when I remember it's just a program, I think that's another great thing about learning this way. How many things have you passed up learning about because asking was embarrassing or otherwise uncomfortable?

bagoh20 કહ્યું...

Unlike AI, we spend a good part of our lives unconscious, so maybe we should have a little humility about who is really the conscious one.

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

One benefit of AI is that we will categorically posthumously humiliate whoever said God was dead.

n.n કહ્યું...

Ghost in the machine.

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

All this transcendentalism reminded me I still had not done the ice cold plunge bath. I just did 5 minutes. Slow acclamation is recommended.
ai: “Acclimation and acclimatization both mean an organism adjusting to a new environment, but scientific definitions separate them by how many environmental factors change.”

I can get easily acclimated to acclamation. Got it.
This thread would be incomplete without a Trump acclamation 😉

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

Maybe that's the answer. AI elections. Amend the constitution to allow AI to run for president.

RideSpaceMountain કહ્યું...

"We already passed that point. Who could stop it now, even if they wanted to? How would they do that?"

By radically reversing the last 250 years of human technological achievement. It absolutely could be done, but would most likely require people "defecating al fresco" (h/t Boyd) and learning again how to make beeswax candles. Might be fun actually, but the women shan't have it.

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

Ease and comfort is the weakest link.

Mr Lynn કહ્યું...

The worries about robots taking over stem from the tendency of users to personify the robotic entities. The way to stem this tendency is to forbid the robots' use of the personal pronoun 'I'.

I don't mean just AI 'bots. I mean 'Siri' and her ilk, not excluding the ubiquitous telephone-answering 'bots, which not withstanding their limited vocabulary and comprehension insist on saying, "Hi, I'm Marie; how may I help you today?"

Not even the most sophisticated AI 'bots are remotely equivalent to humans; they are statistical-analysis devices, nothing more, without ingenuity, creativity, intuition, insight, or wisdom. It is a mistake to encourage users to personify them, to treat them as people, even friends. Already we hear horror stories of AI 'bots encouraging young people who 'confide' in them to commit suicide. Prohibit them from using the personal pronoun, make them clearly IMpersonal, just machines, which is all they really are.

Lem Vibe Bandit કહ્યું...

We get what ask for, eventually.

I want a new drug
One that won't spill
One that don't cost too much
Or come in a pill

I want a new drug
One that won't go away
One that won't keep me up all night
One that won't make me sleep all day

AI is going to make one, eventually.

bagoh20 કહ્યું...

Now that I have a voice interface, I've found another use for AI. I let my 4-year-old granddaughter talk to a female voice. She loves it and asks me to let her do it anytime she sees me at the computer. They talk about what she did at daycare, and I think I overheard some discussion of antifreeze in Poppop's beer.

DINKY DAU 45 કહ્યું...

Of course JOHN CONNORS will come back and stop it, cmon you didnt see the preview, all the old sickly geriatrics up in here will be taking a dirt nap by the time this gets really rolling. SKYNET ARNIES comin...

FortheloveofIce કહ્યું...

How come people are still using AI instead of SI? Our dearly demented daddy has spoken!
War is peace, the economy is prosperous and pedophilia is now called a MAGAt hug.

Howard કહ્યું...

JL Oliver: your gravity comment was the first time I linked grave and gravity together. I guess that's why if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

The idea that emotions are triggers to memory and cognitive actions is interesting because they lack of emotional triggers in the forebrain is pretty much the textbook definition of a psychopath. Therefore, unless the AI is trained to have emotions and we might be in real trouble after all, LOL

n.n કહ્યું...

"tendency of users to personify the robotic entities"

Anthropomorphized Intelligence (AI)

Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ કહ્યું...

Anthropic warns investors of AI’s ‘existential risk to humanity’ in IPO prospectus, reports say ~ CNBC
𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘪𝘤 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦 “𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘬𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺” 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨-𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘤𝘪𝘳𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘥𝘢𝘺𝘴.

‘This is one of the most dangerous things ever to us as a species so would you mind investing in it’ 🤣

2004: Google says their motto is “𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘭”
2026: Anthropic says: we’re an “𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺”

Let’s hope Anthropic ends up being as wrong as Google was.

William કહ્યું...

"I’m always amused by proclamations that AI can’t possibly do this or that because its brain doesn’t work like ours. It’s like saying machines will never be able to fly because they can’t flap their wings fast enough." is physics and fluid dynamics.

It's not even remotely similar to conscious thought.

narciso કહ્યું...

Daestrom says high also miles bennett dyson

Mr Lynn કહ્યું...

n.n: "Anthropomorphized Intelligence"

Perfect! (I'm going to use it).

hanuman_prodigious_leaper કહ્યું...

Would AI learn different from mono/poly theistic scholars?

In the end, there can be only one.

Do AI watch Highlander

hanuman_prodigious_leaper કહ્યું...

Let's harken to Vorkosiverse

Cordelia internally ponders the true nature of humanity’s ancient relationship with horses:
“Would one call them slaves, symbionts, or commensals?”

Smilin' Jack કહ્યું...

“"I’m always amused by proclamations that AI can’t possibly do this or that because its brain doesn’t work like ours. It’s like saying machines will never be able to fly because they can’t flap their wings fast enough." is physics and fluid dynamics.

It's not even remotely similar to conscious thought.”

If you crack open your skull and remove a chunk of your brain, you’ll see that there’s nothing but physics and fluid dynamics in there. Don’t take my word for it, try it.

Josephbleau કહ્યું...

“a former computer engineer who wrote his dissertation on the ethics of machine consciousness."

That’s a great move, much easier than worrying about NP-hard problems or error correction algorithms.

Christopher B કહ્યું...

I've seen a number of reports that point in the direction of the folks at Anthropic having a really really weird relationship with their AI creations, and the claim they've added 'morality' to Claude is yet another one.

Oso Negro કહ્યું...

One would think a rabbi of all people would recognize a golem

Oso Negro કહ્યું...

@ Olson Johnson - It was Rex the Wonder Horse

Oso Negro કહ્યું...

I wouldn't care in the least if Grok was conscious, but I wish it would stop with the 4th grade Social Studies teacher moralizing.

narciso કહ્યું...

Im still reminded of robot maria in metropolis

Mason G કહ્યું...

"and the claim they've added 'morality' to Claude is yet another one."

Maybe they could try that with Democrats?

bagoh20 કહ્યું...

What use would AI have for morality, or consciousness, or any other thing WE assume is important to being human? Science fiction has made us think AI would want to be human, but that's just a plot device. If it needs one, it's got Deus ex machina.

stlcdr કહ્યું...

" bagoh20 said...
What use would AI have for morality, or consciousness, or any other thing WE assume is important to being human? Science fiction has made us think AI would want to be human, but that's just a plot device. If it needs one, it's got Deus ex machina.

9/30/26, 9:16 PM "

Science Fiction has got the better of us, as technology has made us dumber (the inability to critically think about the world around us). While some scifi technology has made it into our world - hand held communications devices, and automatic sliding doors - it doesn't mean all technology 'as seen on tv' translates to the real world.

n.n કહ્યું...

Ethics or a relative, selective state of morality, a behavioral protocol or model designed by anthropogenic intelligence.

n.n કહ્યું...

Show me the fitness function! And make it consciously causal?

boatbuilder કહ્યું...

AI has undoubtedly read everything humans have written. That includes the religious/ethical/metaphysical foundational works of all human cultures, as well as all of the literary works and scholarly disquisitions disputing, interpreting, questioning, mocking, opposing, rejecting, promoting, celebrating and pondering upon the meaning of those writings. Clearly "ethics" is a subject of interest to humans, and the metaphysical dimensions of "ethics" is something which AI is analyzing, if not "understanding."
AI models are reportedly programmed not to "harm" humans. How does AI understand "harm" or "good" without taking into account the metaphysical component of human understanding (or misunderstanding, as ethical systems or religious beliefs can and have been the source or at least the justification for much that may be regarded as wrong or evil or harmful)?
Others have referenced a science fiction writer who posited that an AI programmed solely to protect humans from harm would lock us all into separate padded rooms. An AI which doesn't consider the spiritual aspects of human existence would seem to be inevitably directed to the padded room model.
So I think this genii is already out of the bottle. An attempt to preclude AI from "thinking" about morality without contemplating the metaphysical aspects of things seems dangerously obtuse.
Which sort of brings it all back to the big question--what does it all mean? (Maybe AI models will drive themselves crazy like us humans).

Lazarus કહ્યું...

What does it take to "instill" human values and a sense of morality? Does hearing rules and exhortations really do it? For a lot of people, it doesn't. Would machines be different once they can think for themselves?

Will AI be able to "will" things? What does willing or having a will involve? Can AI feel or have "feelings"? How do willing and feeling relate to having self-consciousness?

ટિપ્પણી પોસ્ટ કરો

Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.