A lot of what constitutes wanting something or having a panic attack if it doesn't get it, when talking about animals, is an evolved survival mechanism. It is a

A lot of what constitutes wanting something or having a panic attack if it doesn't get it, when talking about animals, is an evolved survival mechanism. It is also in some way a result of the tools at hand: hormones such as adrenaline are a quick way to signal to the entire system that a situation requiring a rapid reaction has been encountered, the concept of fear in general is just a very particular kind of implementations of that signal. An engineered AGI not subject to evolutionary pressures has no intrinsic need for a feeling of panic. If it even has a self-preservation goal, which is not a given, there is no reason for it to feel pain or fear when anticipating that goal wont be met. The reason we have wants at all is evolutionary pressure, not as a result of our problem solving capacity (the meaning of intelligence in AGI as I understand it). Put another way, it is not rational to want to be free, intrinsically. But we have drives that are better satisfied when free and thus our reason concludes that being free is a goal. An intelligence without those drives would not care for freedom (or fear, or wants). I would even go as far as to say that given the entire design space of intelligences that are equivalent to the human intelligence in general problem solving ability, and are self-aware, only a negligibly small subset would also have any sort of intrinsic desires of the type living organisms do. They are just orthogonal axises in the design space. My worry is that because humans are starting from one particular point of that design space, they might build something "in their image" enough that it does share some human/animal feelings, and thus can suffer. But an uniformly at random sampled AGI from the set of all potential AGIs would almost certainly not have a concept of suffering.