intuition is doing a lot of the work. “it’s just a computer!”, “it’s just statistics”
we have zero idea how consciousness works. so fact is: we have no idea if LLMs are conscious
i suspect many are answering a proxy, like “is it as morally valuable as a human?”, “does it feel like a human does?”. and they reject that because it feels absurd
The reaction to Dawkins deciding Claude is conscious is fascinating.
It really is just the Strong AI position that Roger Penrose was criticising in the 1980s. If you think consciousness is just an emergent property of a sufficiently complex computer then of course AI is conscious. It passes the Turing test and that’s it.
The really interesting part is why it is obvious to so many of us that AI is *not* conscious: obvious to the point we think Dawkins’ credulity is amusing. What are we basing that on? Are we deluded or is there something else to consciousness that we cannot articulate but that we clearly sense?