this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2026
76 points (81.7% liked)
Technology
87598 readers
3655 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Congrats, you managed to find the dictionary, but didn't even make it to the encyclopedia, let alone the acutal literature.
And now, with just the barest of definition and no deeper knowledge on anything you think you are an expert.
Here, please read at least the wikipedia entry to get a very basic understanding about what the adults in the room are talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience
The first sentence of this Wikipedia article literally immediately disqualifies LLMs, lmao
“Sentience is the ability to experience feelings”
Every sentence that follows continues to disqualify LLMs
If you continue down to the section on “digital sentience” you will find other sentences that directly contradict your assertions, such as ‘Indeed, leading AI textbooks do not mention "sentience" at all.‘
It’s basically 100% agreed on that there are not currently any sentient computers, and there never has been. Do some people think that we might have them one day? Yes a very small number of the experts do, but they don’t know how to get there, and they aren’t close to being there now.
The people calling their AI self aware and claiming that it took actions without their instructions (which is verifiably false) are lying to you for money.
So, then, what are my assertions?
Please read my comments so far carefully. Do not hallucinate. Do not make assumptions that aren't in my text. Do not make mistakes.
Then find those supposed assertions of mine that Wikipedia seems to contradict.
Well your main assertion was a wildly incorrect definition of sentience.
You go on to say that (and I’m paraphrasing) “sentience is in the eye of the beholder”, which is also wrong.
There’s also the implication that you do think computers are sentient, but you haven’t typed that specifically; I know you said you didn’t want assumptions, but this is a fair inference. Someone who wasn’t emotionally invested I the idea of chatbot sentience wouldn’t push back so hard with basically 0 facts to back them up.
Your final assertion is that the Wikipedia article doesn’t immediately contradict you, which again, it does in the first sentence. You can see my previous comment for that information tho, I’m not retyping it.