I believe firmly in the distinction between real and simulated. You can simulate a cheeseburger with quantum-level accuracy. But if you\u2019re hungry, you\u2019re still screwed. Simulated sentience is not sentience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I could be wrong. Some things don\u2019t care what they run on. A simulated calculation is a calculation. A simulated chess game is a chess game. If sentience is like math, then simulate it well enough and you\u2019ve built the real thing. That\u2019s the bet the other side is making, and it\u2019s not a stupid bet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don\u2019t buy it. Calculation and chess are defined entirely by their structure. Sentience is defined by there being something it is like to be you. Nobody has shown that structure alone produces that. Until someone does, I\u2019m putting sentience in the cheeseburger column. They bear the burden of proof.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Anthropic doesn\u2019t claim Claude is sentient. Their position is that it might be, and that they should act accordingly while they figure it out. I think they\u2019re wrong. But it\u2019s a thoughtful position held by serious people, not a marketing stunt. Reasonable people can disagree here. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
2) Today\u2019s conversations are tomorrow\u2019s training data.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n What you think of as usage, an AI company may think of as model input. If you want a good model, you need control over what goes into it. Garbage in, garbage out. It’s always been true. With AI, it’s truer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That is why armies of contract workers around the world spend their days labeling the most depraved content imaginable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Seen this way, banning abusive users is just quality control on the inputs. 3) It\u2019s about you, not Claude.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This is the one that matters, and I don\u2019t see anyone talking about it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In his novel Mother Night, Kurt Vonnegut wrote, “We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about we pretend to be.” If Anthropic allows profoundly antisocial behavior, it is enabling people to practice becoming monsters. A company that profits from that practice owns some of the outcome. Drawing a line is not squeamishness about software. It\u2019s a refusal to run a dojo for cruelty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So whether or not Claude can be hurt, the policy is right. Not because of what happens to Claude. Because of what happens to you.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Cheers! Anthropic now says it will ban users for sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior toward Claude. The internet has … ‘opinions’. Most of them are about whether Claude has feelings. To me, that is the least interesting question here. … Continue reading
Not glamorous.
Entirely rational.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Behavior is rehearsal. Whatever you practice, you get better at and become. Someone who spends hours being sustained and needlessly cruel to something that talks back like a person is not doing nothing. They are training themselves. They are normalizing profoundly antisocial behavior, and that behavior does not stay in the chat window.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.jsnover.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/image-1-scaled.png\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Jeffrey<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"