The paper isn't saying "AI can't have one" it's saying (very approximately) that behavioral mimicry is not the path to one.

▲

FrustratedMonky 8 hours ago | parent [-]

That is good point.

Just wondering, once an 'AI Model of Some Form', is in a Physical Body a 'robot', and is provided with some rules about survival so it doesn't fall into a hole. After a series of these events, does it matter? Does mimicry become reality, or no longer differentiable.

Kind of the philosophical zombie argument. If a robot can perfectly mimic a human, can you really know the internal state of the 'real' one is different from the 'mimicked' one.

	▲	nzeid 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The paper isn't concerned specifically with survival. It's saying that you cannot achieve "abstraction" (presumably the structure that underlies critical thinking, creativity, etc.) through shear mimicry. Again, just echoing the paper here. I don't know that I'm doing it justice.