I think if Harris had kicked Trump in the nuts by calling him a traitor and a pedo, and promised medicare for all she would have won.

It’s all about size and appearance. Who’s petting the ten-foot long centipedes?

Here comes the supremos to equate money with speech.

You can’t prove a human isn’t a Chinese Room.

Humans have emotions.

So either Chinese Rooms can have emotions or we are unable to show whether Chinese Rooms have emotions.

Either way, the Chinese Room isn’t enlightening on the question of AI suffering.

Looking around, it seems we don’t know whether a Chinese Room can have emotions, which suggests that we don’t understand what it means to have a emotions.

The discussion was about suffering which I take to be an emotional response. The comment I responded to seem to say a “chinese room” argument was a unassailable argument without elaborating why. The only way I make sense of that comment is that the author thinks it’s already proved that a Chinese Room can’t experience emotions.

Yes, the Chinese Room argument was originally about understanding but I don’t see how that enters into this discussion.

In this context the question is whether a Chinese room can suffer. We can’t show a human isn’t a Chinese room, humans can suffer so we can’t show every Chinese room doesn’t suffer.

Chinese room is not at all airtight. We don’t know what it means to have emotions so we can’t prove a Chinese room can’t have emotions.

It also greatly improved readability of the language. Since switching to the standard of using 4-space tabs, I’ve not had any problems except when dredging up someone’s old Python 2 code.