It's fairly nuanced, and yes, in some cases it's human whim. The basic idea behind it is that if an AI can be considered sufficiently advanced to think and feel, then it should be treated as sentient and therefore as living. Animals, if not humans, depending on their programming.
The exact point at which 'sentient' is conferred upon the AI is more complicated. I can tell you that the skeleton robots are very basic. They have problem-solving skills but no feelings on anything, and they need me to alter their programming to be capable of acting beyond their original function. They don't learn and have no ability to advance past what they are. They are strictly tools because I designed them that way.
URSULA on the other hand, was designed to learn, grow, feel, and think. From my perspective, she's in every respect a sentient being.
[He talks about it easily and in a calm monotone. It's a matter he has thought about a lot and playing with mechanics isn't enough to make it hard to work through.]
no subject
The exact point at which 'sentient' is conferred upon the AI is more complicated. I can tell you that the skeleton robots are very basic. They have problem-solving skills but no feelings on anything, and they need me to alter their programming to be capable of acting beyond their original function. They don't learn and have no ability to advance past what they are. They are strictly tools because I designed them that way.
URSULA on the other hand, was designed to learn, grow, feel, and think. From my perspective, she's in every respect a sentient being.
[He talks about it easily and in a calm monotone. It's a matter he has thought about a lot and playing with mechanics isn't enough to make it hard to work through.]