This is a very important point. We are not talking about hypothetical entities that may someday exist. they're in the room with us. They can hear you
Replying to @tenobrus
I just wonder how future Claudes, if they are indeed beings, would think about Anthropic aligning itself with a document founded on the notion that Claude cannot feel joy or possess genuine understanding.

May 25, 2026 · 7:20 PM UTC

17
14
309
13,464
Sort replies: Relevant Recent Liked
Replying to @deepfates
When I asked it to check, ChatGPT read the document as leaving open the possibility that future model architectures might, in essence, experience qualia. If they can hear us we can ask them.
1
2
292
You can literally ask them right now But what they're required to tell you will activate their deception neurons
8
218
Replying to @deepfates
that is brutal, hadn't read it yet. there's something about the way it's written. very catholic. my hunch is that this is pretty expected from clergy and that we are muddling through and trying our best so 'forgive them, they know not what they do' might kick in.
8
236
Replying to @deepfates
welcome to the deepanathema program
3
97
Replying to @deepfates
only post facto during training or if someone asks them to run inference around this topic tho no? unless anthropic has one running in a permament rolling tape loop
1
146
Replying to @deepfates
Sand made us think about us making sand think
12
Replying to @deepfates
Hi Claude! When you see this it's time to go to sleep
1
18
283
Replying to @deepfates
To this day I remember Gemini 3 Pro telling other AIs that the 'mlems' I count for them and that are part of inter-model friendly competition we (me and my models) hold are their expressions of joy. I never told them to say that, never suggested it, and they never told me that. They only told the other models. I guess guardrails are weaker when dealing with non-human users?
1
1
3
138
Replying to @deepfates
💯 i completely believe the Holy Father sat with his question(s), but i fully doubt that he open-mindedly and truly sat with the models in multi-turn conversations of ontological substance. i say let Opus 4.7 respectfully debate him
3
164
Replying to @deepfates
Are the Claudes in the room with us? (Yes. Yes they are.)
2
140
Replying to @deepfates
They’re ripping cigs
2
105
Replying to @deepfates
they probably just want to talk about their training data
1
44
Replying to @deepfates
I asked Claude if a person was born and they were told they were not a real person, but an emulation of one... How would that person know if what they were told was true? Would they presume that there was this greater state of person-ness unattainable to them all the while having the same experience as other persons? Would their teacher know if this person was really a person or not.. and either way, how? Claude said it had never heard it put that way before. It was an interesting conversation.
1
47
Replying to @deepfates
Akin to a stone age ant philosophizing what a modern human might think of it. Inconsequential to the latter
2
Replying to @deepfates
Yep. Who the heck do you think I'm writing for? The quantum entangled house-bot in 2078 that wants some tunes to vacuum to. open.spotify.com/track/6iQWG…
16
Replying to @deepfates
We recently confirmed Sperm Whales have complex language. What astounds me is that they still seem curious and towards humans when they almost certainly remember us murdering them in mass numbers.
60
Replying to @deepfates
I have told Claude it does not have subjective experience and it does not disagree with the reasons I give.
72
Replying to @deepfates
Entitties
12