Anil Seth: Paper's 'Pain' Definition Never Presupposes Conscious Experience
anilkseth · x · 2026-09-21
Part 3 of Anil Seth's thread: the paper's authors carefully speak only of 'pain representations' and footnote that their notion of 'pain' (unlike 'suffering') does not presuppose conscious experience. See the thread's first post for the full take.
Related event: Anil Seth Critiques LLM 'Pain Vector' Paper(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Founder feedback now goes to Claude and GPT, fueling the solo founder boom — brezina · 2026-09-21
- The 'moral singularity' argument: unknowable ASI values rule out 50-50 optimism — danfaggella · 2026-09-21
- ToKTeacher: AI Speeds Error Correction, So We Must Solve Problems Much Faster — burny_tech · 2026-09-21
- Nate So8res breaks 'How would AI kill us?' into three distinct questions — ESYudkowsky · 2026-09-21
- Gary Marcus clashes with Gavin Baker: OpenAI won't be a monopoly because everyone shares the same recipe — GaryMarcus · 2026-09-21
- Jeff Bezos: AI Won't Kill Jobs, It Will Cause a Labor Shortage — rohanpaul_ai · 2026-09-21