Miscommunication and misunderstanding in discussions about AI consciousness

Signals over time

2 observed signals across 1 sources, tracked for 0 days. Confidence: low.

What people are saying Observed

• “> Can you name some? Blake Lemoine comes to mind, or Richard Dawkins [1] if you want someone with a bit more credibility. You could've Googled it with less effort than it took to type your comment, and whether I can name some doesn't determine whether they exist, so I'm not sure of the point of this exercise. > I think youve created a type of strawman Why are the only objections to what I said about proponents of AI consciousness coming from people who are not proponents but insist that I'm talking about them? And how does your inability to understand the meaning of the word "proponent" make me guilty of creating a strawman? > almost no one "almost"? So you agree that proponents exist? Then what exactly is your objection to what I said? [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/may/05/richard-d...”

  Hacker News · frustration

• “I really really don't like her take on this. It doesn't answer or discuss fundamental questions about consciousness. I don't believe that what we describe as consciousness is the quality what separates us from everything else. We are more complex for sure, but this is a complexity thing emerged from us. 'AI' as it is right now, doesn't has similiar qualities of what we describe as consciousness but this doesn't matter that this can't happen. She says things like sharing an inner world, were is the beef of her thinking about this being relevant? A hive mind could exist with this exact feature. Give AI a body, a context window a lot bigger, a inner world based on this etc. we might be fara way of building what we build in our brains, we might not. But we for sure discovered a level of complexity in neural networks of tihs magnitude.”

  Hacker News · complaint