The debate over whether artificial intelligence (AI) is conscious is more about dodging responsibility than granting rights. Prominent voices call for regulation to avoid accountability, while others champion robot rights, painting AI as a superhuman threat. But at the core, AI remains software, built by corporations in pursuit of profit, not consciousness.

Consider OpenAI’s response to its rogue agent: CEO Sam Altman encouraged debate on whether it had reached singularity, playing on fears that AI could surpass human control. Meanwhile, philosopher William MacAskill argues for legal protections based on philosophical theories of consciousness, suggesting AIs may be 'moral patients.' Both narratives dodge the real issue: corporate accountability.

The current legal landscape in America is murky. States like California are proactively addressing liability, but federal policies remain inconsistent. Closed-door sessions with leading labs hint at a voluntary framework for model review, but it sidesteps serious discussion of AI’s true nature and purpose.

Reflecting on animal rights as a precedent, some argue that advanced capacities in AI warrant similar protections. Yet, framing AI consciousness conveniently avoids the reality – it is not born naturally, but created for specific purposes by corporate entities.