9 comments

[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 40.4 ms ] thread
None. Not everything that "can feel pain" is our responsibility.

What's our responsibility and what's not is based on made up morals, which are based on either evolutionary benefits and dangers combined with random historical developments.

I guess this raises the question of a "Turing test for pain".
Humans already subjugate other humans and animals to so much pain and suffering, why would they care about AI?

I don't think pain can be felt without the ability to have emotions, and no emotions are possible without personality (that "I" feeling), until AIs can feel real emotions and have a personality than they won't ever be able feel pain.

How exactly do we come to the conclusion that a system feels pain? Is it because it told us so?

In very cold weather, my car tells me the tires need air. The warning, like that of the time to change oil is bright yellow and flashes when I start the car. Is my car in pain? Is it unethical to drive my car when it is cold as I'm hurting it? Would the answer change if in addition to a warning light a voice were to say. "Your tires are low and it hurts me"?

In my opinion, we have no ethical obligation to any non-living system. I think we certainly have a stronger ethical duty of care with respect to the shared resources we consume than we do to any AI system powered by those resources.

It's called mechanical empathy. Some people have it, others don't.
"Pain" is a poor word to use in this context. Pain is what you feel when you stub your toe. AI does not experience that.

I think the question relates to various ideas of mental distress. You might get better answers asking if AI feels rejection, loss, embarrassment etc. Personally I still think the answer is no.

Not to mention that language models don't experience ANYTHING.

Anyone can get a better explanation from Gemini directly if you ask it "can you explain how don't experience anything?"

Maybe let's not program them to feel pain then? </bigbrain>