Ai Conoclast

Of course it matters, and I've already stated why in the article itself (see section "Some implications with the impossibility of artificial consciousness"): In addition, I've also stated in this thread that when supposed "rights" of non-conscious entities are pitted against those of human beings and animals, it amounts to violation of human rights and animal rights. I don't want people or animals be ruled against in a court of law in favor of an inanimate object (definition of inanimate https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inanimate ) Again, this is a matter of human rights https://www.britannica.com/topic/human-rights Note how there is a "moral demand." No moral demands (see Brittanica article) exists for inanimate objects. They should never be granted moral rights. This should be a matter of course. If you need further explanation, or have further questions on these matters, these are the places to contact me: 1. By responding to where my original article was first published (sometimes notifications aren't reliable there, but could still try): https://towardsdatascience.com/artificial-consciousness-is-impossible-c1b2ab0bdc46 2. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dhsing/ You can't see my profile unless logged in, so here are my qualifications for talking about these subjects: In addition, I spent more than 7 years researching, reading, and discussing related subjects before I wrote my article. I highly recommend LinkedIn since there are countless highly knowledgeable and accomplished people on there. You just have to follow the right people and get in on the right discussions when they post their thoughts. Here are some examples of who to follow: Gary Marcus - One of the foremost experts in the AI field Subbarao Kambhampati - Former President of The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (He presented many findings surrounding the inability of LLMs to plan) Missy Cummings - A former fighter pilot, now a professor and an AI / Autonomous vehicle safety expert J. Mark Bishop - Professor of Cognitive Computing (Emeritus), Goldsmiths, University of London (He's the author of the paper "Artificial Intelligence is stupid and causal reasoning won't fix it") Hector Zenil - Researcher, Senior Lecturer School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King’s College London There are also many lurkers who normally don't comment much but would sometimes pop in when they notice your comments, like when an UN technology representative from Slovakia commented to one of my responses to someone else's post. Not only was she familiar with European tech legislation which was the topic, she went on in great detail about the history of tech legislation in the United States as well. Sure, it may be a part of her job to know but that conversation was really informative and humbling to me. Before I leave, a message: In dishonor of April Fools' Day I'd like all the real fools to snap out of their foolishness by simply accepting evidence. Why? Fools are impervious to evidence, and never deal with specifics while speaking in platitudes. It doesn't matter how much evidence that may be presented, they just push it aside. They're hopeless until they stop their denialism. X isn't true simply because you said so. Present evidence and reference in support. X isn't false simply because you said so. Present evidence and reference to the contrary. Again, you know where to reach me. Farewell.