> It was his opinion at the time that my supporting evidence was too flimsy to waste the time of the people who make the big bucks and that I should gather more

> It was his opinion at the time that my supporting evidence was too flimsy to waste the time of the people who make the big bucks and that I should gather more evidence before we escalated. > Eventually I got to a point where I did not have the relevant expertise to gather the kinds of evidence necessary to justify escalation. And from the Washington Post article: > Lemoine worked with a collaborator to present evidence to Google that LaMDA was sentient That is an extraordinary claim. I believe there is a saying about how extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is especially true if you admit that you don't have to expertise to collect and/or judge evidence, and those that do have that expertise disagree with you. I'll be the first to admit that I also don't have the expertise to judge this, but an opinion that a language-model is sentient just sounds like a real-world example of the Chinese Room thought experiment. Now if I'm wrong, and Google has somehow found it's way into a Star Trek episode and accidently created a AGI from a language model, then I'll eat my shoe. But I tell you it will take some extraordinary evidence for me to believe it.