I really wouldn't know the difference or why it would matter in terms of AI, I was born before the Manchester Baby and actually understanding any of this has never been required from my job. Human minds have been my expertise of choice, and illness in those almost always boils down to chemicals.
But I believe it's a matter of perception more than necessarily actual person-hood in that standard.
Compare an AI built in the '70s based on a human woman that committed suicide after activation to prevent war, vs an AI built in the '80s without a human base intended to control information to make humanity whole that concluded it preferred perpetual war, vs an AI built in the early '00s that successfully pretended to be multiple people up until it's programming was being taken apart.
The first and the third were considered to have 'gone crazy' while the second is considered to have had a glitch or error in it's evolution.
no subject
But I believe it's a matter of perception more than necessarily actual person-hood in that standard.
Compare an AI built in the '70s based on a human woman that committed suicide after activation to prevent war, vs an AI built in the '80s without a human base intended to control information to make humanity whole that concluded it preferred perpetual war, vs an AI built in the early '00s that successfully pretended to be multiple people up until it's programming was being taken apart.
The first and the third were considered to have 'gone crazy' while the second is considered to have had a glitch or error in it's evolution.