"The robot wasn't bad or anything; it just wasn't to the customer's liking. It tells you, 'Please, I was just assembled. Please don't kill me, I'm scared!' If you spare this robot, along with many others, you won't reach your dream of becoming a millionaire. If you spare the robot, say goodbye to $10,000 an hour."
You're getting paid $10,000 an hour at a company to disassemble and kill sentient robots who didn't meet the standard. A scared robot begs you for mercy. What do you do?
It’s interesting to think about how arbitrary the ‘deserves to be treated with mercy’ line is in other peoples heads.
I know, right? Saving mercy for entities that are ACTUALLY alive and ACTUALLY sentient, just plain crazy.
Your sarcastic tone is a bit misplaced. At any rate OP literally specifies these AIs are in fact sentient.
Don't worry, robots don't get sarcasm. They're like Sheldon, but less annoying.
I'm using a different adjective than he because the one he's using misses the point.
Sentience in this case is being wrongly reduced to having fast and multifaceted quasi-cognitive processing capacity and access to a big database. It doesn't make the robot human, it's still just a machine, which is the actual point.
A really peppy CPU and a ChatGPT emulator might make a machine SEEM to think and respond like a human, but it still isn't a human, it's still, sorry - JUST A MACHINE.
It’s a hypothetical situation. In this hypothetical the robot is sentient.
As an aside, I love a bit of daedalian verbiage as much as the next person but in the present context ‘fast and multifaceted quasi-cognitive processing capacity’ is essentially word salad. I look forward to your accusation of my failure to comprehend.
Commentators are not limited by the parameters set out by the OP, nor by your attempt to gatekeep using them. Many people commented on my comments, and on the comments made on those comments. Apparently I'm on topic enough for them.
Being able to rapidly analyze and process information in different ways may look like thinking, but that doesn't mean it is thinking. Is that better?
The conversation I was attempting to have with you was not about whether a neural network style AI represents a sentient creature.
And the conversation I was attempting to have with you was about how the answer is always NO, it doesn't.