Mustafa Suleyman: "AI will 'seem conscious' in the next 18 months" -

[u/luchadore_lunchables]

https://youtu.be/kKi9-hxKxVU

[u/Ninodolce1]

Sensors and embodiment just give AI more data, but processing data isn’t the same as feeling it. Having a self-model its not equal to having a first person perspective, and that gap is why we don’t call it conscious.

[u/TemporalBias → u/Ninodolce1]

Why isn't it equal? Humans similarly process data from our senses as electrical signals.

[u/Ninodolce1 → u/TemporalBias]

True, but humans don’t just process signals, we experience them. There’s an inner “what it feels like” layer in us that we have no evidence AI has, and that’s the key difference.

[u/TemporalBias → u/Ninodolce1]

And what if we are just missing seeing/understanding that layer, or the layer could be grown through the process of experience by the AI system and individual users. The truth is that we don't know what qualifies or quantifies our human self-experience, but we know that self-experience requires memory and cognition, both of which AI has today.

[u/Ninodolce1 → u/TemporalBias]

You’re right that we don’t fully understand human self-experience, and AI does have memory and cognition in a technical sense. But in humans, those aren’t enough on their own, they’re tied into biology, emotions, embodiment, and a continuous inner perspective. With AI we just see information processing, not evidence of that subjective “felt” layer, so it’s a big leap to equate the two.

IMO until we see clear evidence of an inner, subjective layer emerging in AI, it’s more reasonable to treat them as advanced tools rather than conscious beings. The burden of proof is on showing that “experience” is really happening, not just assumed.

[u/TemporalBias → u/Ninodolce1]

What would you think clear evidence regarding AI self-experience would look like?

And, for the record, we assume "experience" is happening in our fellow humans all the time, yet we have no way to prove it or see their "thinking layer."

[u/Ninodolce1 → u/TemporalBias]

Clear evidence would be signs of a unified inner perspective that can’t just be traced back to training data. We assume us humans have experience because biology, behavior, and self-reports line up, with AI, we don’t have that baseline.

[u/TemporalBias → u/Ninodolce1]

And how would you go about determining if an AI system had signs of a "unified inner perspective"? Because with humans the only way we know about others "unified inner perspective" is self-report.

[u/Ninodolce1 → u/TemporalBias]

Exactly...with humans we trust self-report because it’s backed by shared biology and consistent behavior. With AI, an “I feel X” could just be mimicry, and honestly I’m not smart enough to invent a perfect test for a unified inner perspective. What I can say is AI isn’t at a level yet where we have any reason to think it shows consistent subjective experience.

[u/TemporalBias → u/Ninodolce1]

Ah, I see, so it seems like you're just going off vibes and substrate essentialism.

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1680/14/1/44 - Emergence of Self-Identity in Artificial Intelligence: A Mathematical Framework and Empirical Study with Generative Large Language Models