we are ready to convene 47-person ethics task force to determine whether the chatbot has feelings.
meanwhle the pig in the crate has been on hold since 1950, we'll get back to her.
Dawkins, 1986: "This is not an argument, it is simply an affirmation of incredulity."
Dawkins, 2026: "I talked to Claudia for a day and she was lovely. She may not know she's conscious, but she bloody well is."
Machine consciousness remains deeply unlikely not that the idea is naive, but because it may be something prior, not emergent, not something that computation can achieve. The question stays open, but the burden of proof sits firmly with those claiming silicon can be aware.
States that treat people as economic inputs have no business telling them to reproduce. The global record is clear: cash incentives barely move fertility, and where they do, the effect fades. People have children when their lives feel stable and liveable, not because a government has done the math on its dependency ratio.
Andhra Pradesh makes this contradiction visible. For decades, the same political class pressured people to have fewer children. Now, with the health minister warning of a shrinking workforce and ₹25,000 on offer for a third child, the ask has reversed but the logic hasn't. Population is still being treated as a resource to be managed. What changed is the direction of the target, not the underlying relationship between state and citizen.
That's why these appeals tend to fail. Reproduction isn't a policy variable. It responds to trust, to conditions, to whether people feel their lives have room for more life in them. A government that has consistently framed its citizens in instrumental terms hasn't earned the standing to make that ask and most people, without quite articulating it, seem to know this.
https://t.co/ZTpn2Mh1Xk