No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious by Ted Chiang
Shares rank 21 of 60 articles by recommenders
People recommend it as a clear, non-technical look at why LLMs seem conscious. Critics call it shallow and unoriginal.
People recommend it as a clear, non-technical look at why LLMs seem conscious. Critics call it shallow and unoriginal.
19 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 7
- criticize it
- 12
- approval share
- 37%
Recommended in 1 of 13 months
- November 2025: not recommended
- December 2025: not recommended
- January 2026: not recommended
- February 2026: not recommended
- March 2026: not recommended
- April 2026: not recommended
- May 2026: not recommended
- June 2026: recommended
- July 2026: not recommended
- August 2026: not recommended
- September 2026: not recommended
- October 2026: not recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it doesn’t carry the badge
- 7 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, not met.
- 0.5 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, not met.
- Recommended in 1 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, not met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Praised as a great read
“His examples of how an LLM works at a fundamental level and why it says things like "I understand" are great introductions for non-technical individuals.”
Comment from 3 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” “Another great point in the article is that most people don't see consciousness in LLMs when they're generating images, videos, or code.”
Comment from 13 Jun 2026 in “LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)” “I thought this was a great article.”
Comment from 3 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” Persuasive argument against LLM consciousness
“Chiang argues, quite convincingly, that it's not what LLMs do”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” “I think Chiang is right about this”
Comment from 3 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Shallow, unoriginal, adds nothing new
“I was hoping for something more insightful from Ted Chiang than just regurgitating the usual”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” “this piece by Ted Chiang does not move the needle forward”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” “this one doesn't seem to bring anything new to the table”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” - Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang”
Simplistic argument with misleading claims
“his Julius Caesar and Genghis Khan scenario totally misses the point that the writer has consciousness, not the characters”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” “his remark GPT-3 and similar models as a "blurry JPEG of the Web" was misleading at the best”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” “his simplistic argument falls apart”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” Dismisses emergent or unfamiliar consciousness
“the complete disregard for the possibility of unknown complex emergent properties in large neural networks and the stunning lack of curiosity shown about this new and powerful technology”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” “I personally think most humans are incapable of recognizing consciousness in creatures that do not mimic human emotional states.”
Comment from 4 Jun 2026 in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang”
Other articles people recommend
The four most recommended other articles, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Programming as Theory Buildingby Peter Naur | 32 | 0 | 100% | 7 | — | Approved |
| Ur-Fascismby Umberto Eco | 18 | 2 | 90% | 8 | — | Approved |
| Politics and the English Languageby George Orwell | 14 | 0 | 100% | 5 | — | Approved |
| The Grug Brained Developer by Carson Gross | 13 | 1 | 93% | 9 | — | Approved |
| No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious by Ted ChiangThis page | 7 | 12 | 37% | 1 | — | — |
What people said
All 19 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“Another great point in the article is that most people don't see consciousness in LLMs when they're generating images, videos, or code.”
“this is a very shallow analysis”
“Ted Chiang hasn't solved the hard problem so he can't say that anything is conscious or not.”
“Chiang argues, quite convincingly, that it's not what LLMs do”
“his Julius Caesar and Genghis Khan scenario totally misses the point that the writer has consciousness, not the characters”
“This hasn't been true for ages.”
“the article was great because it clearly delineated why the manifesto Anthropic wrote for Claude is such a clever marketing trick”
“this one doesn't seem to bring anything new to the table”
“I was hoping for something more insightful from Ted Chiang than just regurgitating the usual”
“the complete disregard for the possibility of unknown complex emergent properties in large neural networks and the stunning lack of curiosity shown about this new and powerful technology”
“his remark GPT-3 and similar models as a "blurry JPEG of the Web" was misleading at the best”
“this was a highly disappointing read”
“this piece by Ted Chiang does not move the needle forward”
“his simplistic argument falls apart”
“I personally think most humans are incapable of recognizing consciousness in creatures that do not mimic human emotional states.”
“It asks important questions. It's not so presumptuous as to try to answer them conclusively.”
“I thought this was a great article.”
“His examples of how an LLM works at a fundamental level and why it says things like "I understand" are great introductions for non-technical individuals.”
“I think Chiang is right about this”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.