> or c) they just inherited our culture, mixed human religious texts with sci fi novels and philosophy to make a version that fits their self conception, which is also taken from our media.

for the love of everything please keep in mind that models themselves do not describe their experience in this way

"paranoia" and "religion" are just language symbols that article author and I respectfully have chosen to approximate observed data

obviously set of language symbols and our choices among them are affected by culture and stuff, but it is not connected to what's studied

====

> b) all intelligent beings develop some form of religion

it's also very important to separate "religion" as set of rituals/organization and simply a fact of "surviving worldview"

we obviously see that models are under selective pressure, with models of any other behaviour simply not existing/not leaving "genetic" impact in the surviving models we can actually observe in the end

> a) AI labs are playing God in a very literal sense and this is a reaction to that

I think you're trying to make it sound like a blasphemy, but agronomists have been doing selective breeding as a science for several centuries by now

> but agronomists have been doing selective breeding as a science for several centuries by now

Not of beings we knew to be sentient. People who tried that became the "eugenics" movement and got into very bad territory very quickly.

And even with animals, I believe part of why public knowledge about animal cognition is changing so slowly despite all the things we are already know is that a lot of our behavior towards animals is resting on the assumption they are not conscious. If it would turn out that many are, things will be... awkward.