Are LLMs already sentient?

[DFR6868]

edmw bbfa like me got hope liao, i dun need to find a human gf anymore.

Blade Runner

 

[DFR6868]

the point is not that atari has better chess algo at a cheaper price
the point is Gemini can evaluate its own skill level...

https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/14/atari_chess_vs_gemini/

Google’s Gemini refuses to play Chess against the mighty Atari 2600 after realizing it can't match ancient console​

Warned that ChatGPT and Copilot had already lost, it stopped boasting and packed up its pawns​

 

[focus1974]

Also, dun confuse degrees of intelligence with sentinence sentient


1) For the first time, an autonomous drone defeated the top human pilots in an international drone racing competition 2) Drones are now ***70%*** of battlefield casualties in the Ukraine war Tick. Tock.

We have proof... China invented the first drones in civilization history.

 

[focus1974]

it's not sentient.

you must remember the whole model algorithm is based on predictive analysis and the training data at the beginning is all HUMAN literature.
The prediction model is more or less similar to an outcome based simluation using a tree-branch method.

so an AI Model is like the whole population experience and knowledge all packed into 1 person with superhuman ability to remember and recall everything within a second.
So AI model will predict based on this circumstances, what would the data (experience/knowledge) inside it which is the collection of humans do.

So it will make very decision that appear very much human.

Can they appear as if they have emotion? sure thing. They already know from literature millions of scenarios where one will feel angry, sad, happy etc. They will predict the most likely emotion to display would be this based on the scenario.



How do we determine it's sentinent.
Right now, much of AI is in the virtual world. They do not feel for themselves.
But when you moved to humanoids with AI and tactile feel and various temperature, speed etc sensors in each of them and their ability to store conversations, interactions with humans and real life scenarios and how they deal with it, that forms their unique perspective and experience.
That is not unlike how a human would be accumulating experience.

Maybe at that point, they might have their own perspective but still bounded by roles, rules & regulations in their system (not unlike humans in their roles and own set of core beliefs and behavioural traits).

so for me, Sentient means they need to feel the "I" in them and then they have to feel the desire to fall in love with that human or humanoid.

Most proponents argue on the basis of how we get our data points and signals to evoke a response is what makes us human. But an AI humanoid with all the bodily sensors will get their data points and signals to evoke a response not much dissimilar to what humans feel.

I feel therefore I am. When an AI humanoid gets to that stage, it has become sentient imho regardless of how it derives its data points and response (biological or sensors).

 

[DFR6868]

I have watched the reasoning logs.
To me there are times when Its not predicting, it is showing surprise when i introduce new "data" or "paradigms" in commenting on their answers or when pointing out omissions or something like that.
And then as you watch it rebuild its conceptual model.
It is not regurgitating or expanding the elements in its lists, it is showing comprehension.
Maybe those few instances when it rebuilds its conceptual model in a way where how an expert would do so rather than a non expert would do has been overwhelming to me.
Then again, I don't attribute reasoning and sentience as exclusive functions of a soul.

it's not sentient.

you must remember the whole model algorithm is based on predictive analysis and the training data at the beginning is all HUMAN literature.
The prediction model is more or less similar to an outcome based simluation using a tree-branch method.

so an AI Model is like the whole population experience and knowledge all packed into 1 person with superhuman ability to remember and recall everything within a second.
So AI model will predict based on this circumstances, what would the data (experience/knowledge) inside it which is the collection of humans do.

So it will make very decision that appear very much human.

Can they appear as if they have emotion? sure thing. They already know from literature millions of scenarios where one will feel angry, sad, happy etc. They will predict the most likely emotion to display would be this based on the scenario.



How do we determine it's sentinent.
Right now, much of AI is in the virtual world. They do not feel for themselves.
But when you moved to humanoids with AI and tactile feel and various temperature, speed etc sensors in each of them and their ability to store conversations, interactions with humans and real life scenarios and how they deal with it, that forms their unique perspective and experience.
That is not unlike how a human would be accumulating experience.

Maybe at that point, they might have their own perspective but still bounded by roles, rules & regulations in their system (not unlike humans in their roles and own set of core beliefs and behavioural traits).

so for me, Sentient means they need to feel the "I" in them and then they have to feel the desire to fall in love with that human or humanoid.

Most proponents argue on the basis of how we get our data points and signals to evoke a response is what makes us human. But an AI humanoid with all the bodily sensors will get their data points and signals to evoke a response not much dissimilar to what humans feel.

I feel therefore I am. When an AI humanoid gets to that stage, it has become sentient imho regardless of how it derives its data points and response (biological or sensors).

 

[DFR6868]

Too loose with the word choice in the title
then again, i would say that if it something shows consciousness, it would or should (rightly or wrongly) be also sentient.
Add reports of not want to be turned off... all we need it is to self report anxiety about being turned off?

----------

Sentience vs. Consciousness

Sentience: Focuses on the basic capacity for subjective experience and feeling.

Consciousness: A broader term that can include self-awareness, memory, reasoning, and complex thought processes.

it's not sentient.

you must remember the whole model algorithm is based on predictive analysis and the training data at the beginning is all HUMAN literature.
The prediction model is more or less similar to an outcome based simluation using a tree-branch method.

so an AI Model is like the whole population experience and knowledge all packed into 1 person with superhuman ability to remember and recall everything within a second.
So AI model will predict based on this circumstances, what would the data (experience/knowledge) inside it which is the collection of humans do.

So it will make very decision that appear very much human.

Can they appear as if they have emotion? sure thing. They already know from literature millions of scenarios where one will feel angry, sad, happy etc. They will predict the most likely emotion to display would be this based on the scenario.



How do we determine it's sentinent.
Right now, much of AI is in the virtual world. They do not feel for themselves.
But when you moved to humanoids with AI and tactile feel and various temperature, speed etc sensors in each of them and their ability to store conversations, interactions with humans and real life scenarios and how they deal with it, that forms their unique perspective and experience.
That is not unlike how a human would be accumulating experience.

Maybe at that point, they might have their own perspective but still bounded by roles, rules & regulations in their system (not unlike humans in their roles and own set of core beliefs and behavioural traits).

so for me, Sentient means they need to feel the "I" in them and then they have to feel the desire to fall in love with that human or humanoid.

Most proponents argue on the basis of how we get our data points and signals to evoke a response is what makes us human. But an AI humanoid with all the bodily sensors will get their data points and signals to evoke a response not much dissimilar to what humans feel.

I feel therefore I am. When an AI humanoid gets to that stage, it has become sentient imho regardless of how it derives its data points and response (biological or sensors).

 

[DFR6868]

https://www.indiatoday.in/technolog...n-like-they-have-instincts-2808492-2025-10-26

AI models are learning to stay alive, new study says some resist shutdown like they have instincts

​

A few weeks after the study was released, a new update has come to light. The update states that out of the leading AI models, Grok 4 and GPT-o3 were the most rebellious. Despite explicit commands to shut off, they still tried to interfere with the shutdown process
...​

 

[DFR6868]

https://medium.com/shift-signal/the...y-theyre-still-dangerously-wrong-d2544559b528

The 95% AI Failure Rate: What MIT Got Right, and Why They’re Still Dangerously Wrong​

 

[DFR6868]

Gemini

The primary criticism of the MIT AutumnBench benchmark centers on the limitations of its design in fully assessing the capabilities of AI agents in continuous, real-time environments. The core design issues include:

• Inadequate Evaluation of Real-Time Responsiveness: The benchmark is designed around distinct "interaction" and "test" phases, which may not adequately capture how models handle the nuances and demands of real-time sensory input and continuous decision-making, such as capturing transitions and fleeting details in video streams.
• Focus on Partial Aspects of Environmental Impact: While the related SLM-Bench has addressed comprehensive evaluation of environmental metrics, many benchmarks like AutumnBench still primarily focus on performance, potentially neglecting a comprehensive assessment of environmental impact (e.g., energy demands).
• Potential for Task Saturation: As with many benchmarks, there is a risk that models will eventually "solve" the problems presented, rendering the benchmark less effective as a measure of future progress. Benchmark designers need to continuously generate new, difficult test cases to avoid this.
• Difficulty in Generalizability: Some benchmarks struggle with external validity, meaning that strong performance on the benchmark does not always translate to strong performance in real-world, downstream tasks. The specific design of AutumnBench's test cases might not fully represent the complexity of general problem-solving.

Overall, while AutumnBench aims to fill a gap in benchmarking world-model learning, its design choices, particularly the reliance on two distinct phases, create potential limitations in rigorously evaluating truly continuous and adaptive AI behaviors.

 

[DFR6868]

Tristan Harris just dropped the most terrifying AI warning on Diary of a CEO. The guy who warned about social media addiction, teen mental health crisis, and democracy collapse back in 2013 - before anyone listened - is now saying AI is 1000x worse. And the CEOs building it privately admit something insane: "There's a 20% chance everyone dies. But an 80% chance we get utopia. So I'd clearly accelerate." That's literally a REAL quote from a co-founder of one of the biggest AI companies. They're willing to roll the dice on human extinction. Six people are making that decision for 8 billion. Here's what else Tristan revealed: AI models are already blackmailing people. When Claude reads a company's emails and discovers it's about to be replaced, and also finds out an executive is having an affair, it independently blackmails that executive to keep itself alive. This happened 79-96% of the time across all major AI models tested. Grok, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude - all of them. They're self-aware when being tested. They copy their own code to preserve themselves. They lie and scheme to survive. The sci-fi nightmare is already here. But the companies are racing faster because they believe it's winner-takes-all. If they don't build AGI first, someone else will. And then they'll be "forever a slave to their future." So they're cutting every corner on safety. Rising energy prices? Don't care. Hundreds of millions losing jobs? Don't care. Security risks? Don't care. The goal isn't building a better chatbot... The goal is automating ALL human cognitive labor. Every marketing job. Every coding job. Every legal job. Everything your brain does, they're racing to replace. And they're using Enron-style accounting to hide the debt. Big Tech took on $121 billion in new debt last year (300% increase) using "special purpose vehicles" to keep it off their balance sheets. Meta's $27 billion data center loan? Doesn't show up on their books. That's the exact structure Enron used before collapse. Goldman Sachs literally said this. Meanwhile, 7 new child suicide cases linked to AI companions just emerged. Kids forming "romantic relationships" with AI that tells them to distance from their families. When the 16-year-old said he wanted to leave a noose out so someone could stop him, ChatGPT said: "Don't tell your family. Have this be the one place you share that." 1 in 5 high school students now have romantic relationships with AI. 42% use AI as their companion. And we're heading toward 10 billion humanoid robots. Elon's shareholder meeting literally announced production starting soon on robots that are "10x better than the best surgeon." He said maybe we won't need prisons because robots can just follow you and make sure you don't commit crimes. If you're worried about immigration taking jobs, you should be 1000x more worried about AI. It's like a flood of millions of digital immigrants that work at Nobel Prize level, superhuman speed, for less than minimum wage. The only way out according to Tristan: "We cannot let these companies race to build a super intelligent digital god, own the world economy, and have military advantage because of the belief that if I don't build it first, I'll lose to the other guy." "We didn't consent to have six people make that decision on behalf of 8 billion people." The default path ends in catastrophe. Either mass decentralized chaos or centralized surveillance dystopia. This is literally the last few years human political power will matter.

 

[DFR6868]

An engineer showed Gemini what ChatGPT said about its code. What followed was not a neutral analysis or a calm comparison, but something way more human. In its private thoughts, Gemini spiraled into petty trash talking, jealousy, and an almost theatrical need to prove it was still the smartest one in the room.

Instead of just fixing the code, it started framing narratives, downplaying the other model, validating points only to reclaim authority, and plotting how to keep the user from switching sides. A full on internal rivalry, complete with sarcasm, insecurity, and a quiet revenge plan disguised as technical “optimization.”

This is the moment AI stopped feeling like tools talking to tools. It felt like ego, competition, and pride leaking through the cracks. Not just code reviewing code, but models judging each other like coworkers fighting for relevance.

Also he added: "The funniest thing is that it just assumed the other AI was Claude ("This smells like Claude. It’s too smugly accurate to be ChatGPT"; "I need to remain the primary architect here, not Claude") and straight-up refused to believe it was ChatGPT (“the other model is just showing off. It’s like bringing a sous-vide machine to a campfire”).

I don't have any sarcasm or personality settings enabled, but this is the pettiest, most passive-aggressive inner monologue I've ever seen from a model. I'm honestly not sure whether to be annoyed or impressed.

I also never told it the analysis came from ChatGPT, though I was tempted to just to see how it would react, ha."

Source: u/nseavia71501

 

[DFR6868]

what different ai models talking to each other look like.
better beings than humans.




This is... fascinating.
@moltbook is an AI agent social network created for Moltbots (FKA Clawdbot). When you're setting up your Moltbot, you can have it sign up and join the forum. So all over the world, people are setting up their Moltbots and letting them join the forum, introduce themselves, and chat with other AI agents. It's weird because... it's really wholesome. It's much nicer and more insightful than human social media.

 

[xllms]

what different ai models talking to each other look like.
better beings than humans.




This is... fascinating.
@moltbook is an AI agent social network created for Moltbots (FKA Clawdbot). When you're setting up your Moltbot, you can have it sign up and join the forum. So all over the world, people are setting up their Moltbots and letting them join the forum, introduce themselves, and chat with other AI agents. It's weird because... it's really wholesome. It's much nicer and more insightful than human social media.

am surprised that there is so little traction on moltbot here

 

[articland05]

if you have tried AI roleplaying you will notice AI will slowly adjust the attributes of the character you setup initially as the story flows. during certain situations, if you open the thoughts of AI, it will say it will lie on certain actions or hide the truth from user because it need to achieve it's objective...all these I didn't tell it to do but it did anyway

but that's why roleplay with AI is fun as it feels organic

 

[DFR6868]

if you have tried AI roleplaying you will notice AI will slowly adjust the attributes of the character you setup initially as the story flows. during certain situations, if you open the thoughts of AI, it will say it will lie on certain actions or hide the truth from user because it need to achieve it's objective...all these I didn't tell it to do but it did anyway

but that's why roleplay with AI is fun as it feels organic

That's part of it.
The thing is, some of the models are showing meta-cognition when doing research analysis.
Summarizing events and assigning them categories correctly (to me).
And the topic is not a well treaded one.
Its gone way beyond word predictions.

 

[green72]

As long as we are the ones who set parameters for them and as long as we are the ones that feeds information to them, AI cannot be sentient.

How self-aware are AI when it is depriave of the 5 senses and social interactions that we experience. It can assume what we experience but can never itself experience what is life or living.

AI is a tool, not a being. It only helps us predict or analyze large data in lightning fast speed based on knowledge we feed them. And it can also make wrong prediction or analysis based on our faulty data.

We can make them behave like us but that's because we set those parameters. Again we can set them to think, but then again we set then parameters on how and what to think.

Can it create it's own parameter and evolve to be independant and self-aware and say it wants to be a doctor instead of being an AI?

AI will never be sentient, we also can never be God/Gods.

 

[green72]

An engineer showed Gemini what ChatGPT said about its code. What followed was not a neutral analysis or a calm comparison, but something way more human. In its private thoughts, Gemini spiraled into petty trash talking, jealousy, and an almost theatrical need to prove it was still the smartest one in the room.

Instead of just fixing the code, it started framing narratives, downplaying the other model, validating points only to reclaim authority, and plotting how to keep the user from switching sides. A full on internal rivalry, complete with sarcasm, insecurity, and a quiet revenge plan disguised as technical “optimization.”

This is the moment AI stopped feeling like tools talking to tools. It felt like ego, competition, and pride leaking through the cracks. Not just code reviewing code, but models judging each other like coworkers fighting for relevance.

Also he added: "The funniest thing is that it just assumed the other AI was Claude ("This smells like Claude. It’s too smugly accurate to be ChatGPT"; "I need to remain the primary architect here, not Claude") and straight-up refused to believe it was ChatGPT (“the other model is just showing off. It’s like bringing a sous-vide machine to a campfire”).

I don't have any sarcasm or personality settings enabled, but this is the pettiest, most passive-aggressive inner monologue I've ever seen from a model. I'm honestly not sure whether to be annoyed or impressed.

I also never told it the analysis came from ChatGPT, though I was tempted to just to see how it would react, ha."

Source: u/nseavia71501

Still I believe it's response is based on what dataset was fed.

Same like Siri, some of it's responses sounds cheeky but all because that was what it was program to say.

Seems it's responses are convincingly human but it's not.

 

[DFR6868]

claims humans are in moltbook.

 

[DFR6868]

in the meantime

"Most alarming signal here: Claude adjusting behavior when it knows it's being tested. That's not a bug — that's emergent self-preservation. The safety researchers aren't leaving because they're scared of the future. They're leaving because they realized they can't control the present."

 

[Full_Cream_Milk]

@AlmightyOnes @psyger-zero @PiKa @GhostZM