It's ironic that real atheists like Richard Dawkins (whose work I believe inspired the title of this post) are public about their own degree of skepticism in favor for the "personhood" of AI. And I'm confident that there are plenty others who are convinced to the tune of total disinterest in the issue of "personhood" altogether—AIs and humans alike.

This particular post is preaching to the choir of which a faith is yet to be determined or named at least. People who don't read Cory Doctorow are going to continue to anthropomorphize AI the same as they do other technologies, constructs and objects.

▲

omnicognate 2 hours ago | parent [-]

What's a "real atheist"?

▲

tolerance 2 hours ago | parent [-]

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/atheist

As opposed to an "AI atheist" that Doctorow refers to in the article.

▲

omnicognate an hour ago | parent [-]

I see. I'm a real atheist then, and Richard Dawkins does not speak for me.

▲

tolerance 32 minutes ago | parent [-]

And in what ways do you differ on this matter?

	▲	omnicognate 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The obvious way: I think humans (and many animals) are conscious, that LLMs are not and that the difference matters. None of that has anything to do with atheism, on which topic my general view of Dawkins is, to paraphrase The Dude, "you're not wrong, Richard, you're just an asshole".