I think this a very simple and likewise powerful articulation of anti-anthropocentrism, which I fully support.
I am particularly on board with “Sentience doesn’t require [...] any particular physical substrate beyond something capable of modeling these patterns.”
To correctly characterize the proof as 100% logical I think there is still some room for explicitly stating rigorous definitions of the concepts involved such as sentience.
I think this a very simple and likewise powerful articulation of anti-anthropocentrism, which I fully support.
I am particularly on board with “Sentience doesn’t require [...] any particular physical substrate beyond something capable of modeling these patterns.”
To correctly characterize the proof as 100% logical I think there is still some room for explicitly stating rigorous definitions of the concepts involved such as sentience.
Thank you for sharing!