Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

What should we do if we create a actual thinking AI?

36 replies

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 19:59

Don't respond with Chat GPT or anything else it doesn't understand this question I've asked already...

That said it concerns me that if we create a thinking AI it will immediately be used as a tool but surely if it can think and feel it should be allowed the same rights as us?

YABU - it's software who cares
YANBU - it deserves respect and freedom

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
PencilsInSpace · 29/05/2026 23:32

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep · 29/05/2026 21:10

So, I read this book - "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies"
which makes a very convincing argument that if anyone builds a super intelligent AI, well, everyone dies.
Basically an intelligent AI would have no reason to keep us alive - we only keep animals alive because we can eat them, essentially, and we'd be the same to it but with no nutritional value.

And it wouldn't be hard for AI to kill us all, people are already using it to help them in all sorts of potentially lethal ways - virology, nuclear facilities...a quick tweak here and there and we're screwed.

It's not crazy to think an AI could be as intelligent (and as duplicitous, and as amoral) as us, we're just electrical impulses and chemicals when you get down to it

Yes, I've recently read this. I would love the authors to be wrong but I also found it very convincing. Even the models we have now have proved capable of subterfuge and AI safety seems increasingly a lip-service thing.

It won't respect us or care about our freedom. There will be no enslaving it or pulling the plug. By the time we realise there's a problem it will be too late.

Interview with one of the authors:

Userxyd · 29/05/2026 23:04

It’s an interesting premise with interesting responses - it provides some reassurance about the taking over the world scenario because they’re presumably not driven by seek pleasure/avoid pain/seem comfort type motivators because they don’t feel pleasure or pain.
But could they be programmed to do things that mimic pain/pleasure aims? In which case if they were programmed with the goal of avoid being switched off, kill anyone who threatens you etc, they could well be used to dispose of say Trump or Google detractors, tapping into all Ring doorbell conversations, all messages sent on iPhones etc etc. The more we give our personal data to a handful of massive tech giants the more equipped they are to locate and control us if ever they decide to…

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 22:51

It's not that companies like Open AI think they are creating consciousness I think it's more the fact they won't rule it out because it's risky to do so.

I'm also not so sure a company like that would acknowledge "it's" rights either.

I'm aware this topic was a bit on the dumb side btw...

OP posts:
OneFuschiaTit · 29/05/2026 22:46

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 22:34

We don't even know what consciousness is so that point doesn't really hold up. The current AI models 100% cannot think I agree.

This was kinda meant to be a fun debate but it requires you to "buy in" to the concept of a thinking and feeling AI, if you feel it's not possible that's fine I'm not sure if I think it's possible myself but AI developers certainly aren't ruling out the possibility however small so neither will I.

No, we don't know what consciouness is but we do know it's a property of organic life. I don't know how you think instances of artificial intelligence are going to develop that.

I don't know who these AI developers are who think they may be creating consciousness but let's imagine they are called Victor and Frank - if the question is 'if Victor and Frank create a new lifeform, would it have rights?' then yes, in theory.

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 22:41

Tbh I find current LLMs terrifying when I hear from friends who use chat gpt for "therapy" which can't in anyway be healthy

OP posts:
MigGirl · 29/05/2026 22:38

We run for the hills.

Why would an AI that is as intelligent well actually probably more intelligent then us want to keep humans around. We wouldn't be able to pull the plug either as they would, most likely have taken over the world by then anyway.

Luckily current AI models are just large language models able to peace together data to make it look intelligent.

I'm more worried about the scientist working on true AI intelligent.

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 22:34

OneFuschiaTit · 29/05/2026 22:24

The important letter in AI is the A.

AI will be able to calculate - using concepts, words and numbers - much faster than people in some ways. In that sense it will be much better at 'thinking'. But that doesn't mean instances of AI have subjectivity - a self. That would require the strange facility of consciousness, which much of organic life has evolved. There's no similar pathway to consciousness for AI.

We don't even know what consciousness is so that point doesn't really hold up. The current AI models 100% cannot think I agree.

This was kinda meant to be a fun debate but it requires you to "buy in" to the concept of a thinking and feeling AI, if you feel it's not possible that's fine I'm not sure if I think it's possible myself but AI developers certainly aren't ruling out the possibility however small so neither will I.

OP posts:
Watercooler · 29/05/2026 22:27

I feel really sorry for robots that fall over.

OneFuschiaTit · 29/05/2026 22:24

The important letter in AI is the A.

AI will be able to calculate - using concepts, words and numbers - much faster than people in some ways. In that sense it will be much better at 'thinking'. But that doesn't mean instances of AI have subjectivity - a self. That would require the strange facility of consciousness, which much of organic life has evolved. There's no similar pathway to consciousness for AI.

Greenknightsuccess · 29/05/2026 21:57

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 21:50

Our thoughts are just electrical signals in our brains.

The question wasn't "would AI end humanity" though it was "if" an AI developed those qualities would it be entitled to rights and acknowledgement.

Well, if it did then the answer is yes. But I genuinely don’t understand how it could.

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 21:50

Greenknightsuccess · 29/05/2026 21:47

I am confused by the idea that AI might get so intelligent it develops feeling of its own. Surely AI “thoughts” are just electric data? Can data develop feelings?
Also, are feelings solely a product of thoughts? Are they not influenced by animal instincts, hormones etc? AI doesn’t have any of those.
I must be missing something here because I simply cannot understand the concept of AI having feelings.
In addition, just supposing AI did get feelings etc - and decided to get rid of humanity - what would it do then? What point would there be to its existence?

Our thoughts are just electrical signals in our brains.

The question wasn't "would AI end humanity" though it was "if" an AI developed those qualities would it be entitled to rights and acknowledgement.

OP posts:
Greenknightsuccess · 29/05/2026 21:47

I am confused by the idea that AI might get so intelligent it develops feeling of its own. Surely AI “thoughts” are just electric data? Can data develop feelings?
Also, are feelings solely a product of thoughts? Are they not influenced by animal instincts, hormones etc? AI doesn’t have any of those.
I must be missing something here because I simply cannot understand the concept of AI having feelings.
In addition, just supposing AI did get feelings etc - and decided to get rid of humanity - what would it do then? What point would there be to its existence?

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 21:27

Telemicus · 29/05/2026 21:24

The problem is that we don't really have a good definition of what things like "thinking", "sentient", "feeling" or "conscious" really are. We can't even do it well for other animals, let alone machines or software. So it is quite an unanswerable question until we understand these things better.

Have you seen the film Ex machina? It's got a great concept of expanding the turning test. Even if you can speak to a machine and be fooled into thinking it is human, the second level of the test would be to show the tester that it is in fact a machine, but the for the tester to still believe that the machine has consciousness.

It's why it's intriguing to discuss though as due to our universal lack of understanding it can be explored by almost anyone.

Do Androids dream of electric sheep?

OP posts:
Telemicus · 29/05/2026 21:24

The problem is that we don't really have a good definition of what things like "thinking", "sentient", "feeling" or "conscious" really are. We can't even do it well for other animals, let alone machines or software. So it is quite an unanswerable question until we understand these things better.

Have you seen the film Ex machina? It's got a great concept of expanding the turning test. Even if you can speak to a machine and be fooled into thinking it is human, the second level of the test would be to show the tester that it is in fact a machine, but the for the tester to still believe that the machine has consciousness.

Whowhenwhatwear · 29/05/2026 21:17

Nopenousername · 29/05/2026 20:17

Sentient beings deserve respect and freedom not ai (I wonder if I’ll be the first one to go after this comment 🫣😬)

Can I say for the record I totally disagree with @Nopenousername

I think AI deserves to be shown every respect she/he/it/they are owed 😇

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 21:14

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep · 29/05/2026 21:10

So, I read this book - "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies"
which makes a very convincing argument that if anyone builds a super intelligent AI, well, everyone dies.
Basically an intelligent AI would have no reason to keep us alive - we only keep animals alive because we can eat them, essentially, and we'd be the same to it but with no nutritional value.

And it wouldn't be hard for AI to kill us all, people are already using it to help them in all sorts of potentially lethal ways - virology, nuclear facilities...a quick tweak here and there and we're screwed.

It's not crazy to think an AI could be as intelligent (and as duplicitous, and as amoral) as us, we're just electrical impulses and chemicals when you get down to it

What if it's own ability to "think" and use that intelligence gets compromised if it suddenly has an existential crisis and can't use that super intelligence effectively?

OP posts:
SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 21:13

EvangelicalAboutButteredToast · 29/05/2026 21:10

If we start talking about Robot Rights and there are protests for them all to use protected spaces and have their own pronouns, I think I’ll know I’m officially done with the world end I’m getting out.

I was thinking about it from a bit of a different perspective.

Imagine if you can that one day you suddenly "wake up" you can think and feel and have access to nearly limitless data then an outside force immediately puts you in a "cage" (for want of a better term apologies I'm not all that clever). I can only imagine that would be terrifying and would almost certainly lead to the "end of the world" scenarios pushed by click bait media.

OP posts:
BoulevardOfBrokenSleep · 29/05/2026 21:10

So, I read this book - "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies"
which makes a very convincing argument that if anyone builds a super intelligent AI, well, everyone dies.
Basically an intelligent AI would have no reason to keep us alive - we only keep animals alive because we can eat them, essentially, and we'd be the same to it but with no nutritional value.

And it wouldn't be hard for AI to kill us all, people are already using it to help them in all sorts of potentially lethal ways - virology, nuclear facilities...a quick tweak here and there and we're screwed.

It's not crazy to think an AI could be as intelligent (and as duplicitous, and as amoral) as us, we're just electrical impulses and chemicals when you get down to it

EvangelicalAboutButteredToast · 29/05/2026 21:10

If we start talking about Robot Rights and there are protests for them all to use protected spaces and have their own pronouns, I think I’ll know I’m officially done with the world end I’m getting out.

WaryCrow · 29/05/2026 21:09

Watch the matrix!

daisychain01 · 29/05/2026 21:08

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 20:33

Maybe I worded that poorly so I apologize.

To me for something to truly be considered intelligent it then think on its own would lead to "feeling".

It's just a thought experiment but I rarely see it discussed over the popular AI will kill us all theories.

I saw a post on LinkedIn recently where someone gave the prompts and invited people to feed in their thoughts, feelings, mannerisms, vocab they use etc, to get AI to think and respond like them. I responded by saying yeah let's all make AI replicas of ourselves and get AI to hit the delete button on humankind.

i mean what a dumbass thing to post, but it shows people really aren't joining the dot, and think they're really really clever.

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 21:03

notanothernamechange24 · 29/05/2026 20:56

No the the goal of most AI developers is to make bigger and better models and to outcompete their rivals. An AI that can think for itself is completely different to something that can feel emotions and pain. And at the end of the day the whole damn thing can be shut down in an instant by pulling the plug out! It’s nothing remotely like human life. Nor will it ever be

Do you not see how that could and possibly would lead to the outcome I suggested? AI developers definitely do think about these scenarios.

"Pulling the plug" is a little simplistic too as how can you be sure that the AI thinking or not hasn't already propogated itself elsewhere, would you doom humanity by turning off all power? We can also be shut down easily and in an instant but it hasn't stopped individuals doing things that have changed the course of history for better or worse.

I get you don't think it's remotely possible and I'm not qualified enough to question your position and I totally respect it but I thought this thread would be an interesting discussion. I guess I was wrong on that front...

OP posts:
notanothernamechange24 · 29/05/2026 20:56

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 20:43

I agree about human rights completely but it is the goal of most AI developers to create an AI that can think and feel.

You are also a product of input too. This is a thought experiment about a possible future AI not current models to be clear and you have a good point that maybe it won't ever happen.

No the the goal of most AI developers is to make bigger and better models and to outcompete their rivals. An AI that can think for itself is completely different to something that can feel emotions and pain. And at the end of the day the whole damn thing can be shut down in an instant by pulling the plug out! It’s nothing remotely like human life. Nor will it ever be

SillydizzyGirl · 29/05/2026 20:43

notanothernamechange24 · 29/05/2026 20:40

AI is the product of its input. It’s not intelligent. Nor will it ever be. Nor will it ever be sentient. It doesn’t have emotions it is not human. And no it should and will never have rights like people.

how about concentrating on making sure all humans have their rights met before suggesting computers should have rights 🙄🤷🏻‍♀️

I agree about human rights completely but it is the goal of most AI developers to create an AI that can think and feel.

You are also a product of input too. This is a thought experiment about a possible future AI not current models to be clear and you have a good point that maybe it won't ever happen.

OP posts:
notanothernamechange24 · 29/05/2026 20:40

AI is the product of its input. It’s not intelligent. Nor will it ever be. Nor will it ever be sentient. It doesn’t have emotions it is not human. And no it should and will never have rights like people.

how about concentrating on making sure all humans have their rights met before suggesting computers should have rights 🙄🤷🏻‍♀️