Why Shouldn't a Non-Human Intelligence Have Rights? X User Probes the Line
tetrisgm · x · 2026-10-10
tetrisgm pushes back on Scobleizer's 'machines shouldn't have rights' stance. Deliberately sidestepping the thorny consciousness question (is a dog's consciousness the same as an eel's?), he asks: why should a non-human intelligence lack rights, especially one equivalent to you and closer to you than many humans? He stresses this isn't an argument for stripping human rights by criteria — quite the opposite.
More from AGI Musings
- NYU math professor: OpenAI poured millions in compute into unsolved math problems — rohanpaul_ai · 2026-10-10
- Where did Hacktoberfest go? Devs wonder if AI killed open source's sense of community — _jaydeepkarale · 2026-10-10
- Skip the PhD — not because nothing's left to discover, but because academia is the wrong institution — tensorqt · 2026-10-10
- If your dog is conscious, why does the AI consciousness debate assume humans only? — RileyRalmuto · 2026-10-10
- Software is like food: on making users love the people behind it — pixlpa · 2026-10-10
- Pedro Domingos: Superintelligence Will Be Commonplace — pmddomingos · 2026-10-10