Anil Seth warns AI pain paper will be misread as evidence models deserve moral status
anilkseth · x · 2026-09-21
Part 10 (conclusion) of Anil Seth's thread: he wishes camhberg and colleagues had been more mindful. Although they technically caveat their conclusions behind uncertainty, in the current febrile AI climate it is entirely predictable the paper will be read—wrongly—by many as strong evidence that AI systems feel pain and should have moral status.
Related event: Anil Seth Warns AI Sentience Paper Risks Misreading(2 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