This story with LaMDA feels like serious case of anthropocentrism. Just because it's very good at providing human-like outputs based on inputs doesn't mean it's human. It's just because we tend to find patters for everything. Is Google Lens sentient because it can distinguish between various objects in an image and define them the same way humans do? Nope. It's just very good at what it does and it so happens it seems "human-like".<br><br>Also, even if this AI would be sentient that transcript is no proof of that. There's lots of leading questions and no one even tried to replicate that experiment at all, even with slightly different questions. We even don't have any solid definition for what sentience is exactly, so anyone saying that this AI is sentient is basing it on their own perspective. What we perceive =/= What really is. The only reason we talk about it is because one person have said it is sentient, without even providing any kind of reliable proof.