Downvoted for lack of credibility.  This post appears to be making a marginal claim on high-value time and information without a supporting track record or vetting process, or even context for how it will be used.

What?

Inspired by the Philpapers survey, we are conducting a survey on experts’ beliefs about key topics pertaining to AI consciousness & moral status. These include:

🧠 Consciousness/sentience

⚖️ Moral status/moral agency

💥 Suffering risk (”S-risk”) related AI consciousness (e.g. AI suffering)

⚠️ Existential risk (”X-risk”) related to AI consciousness (e.g. resource competition with conscious AI)

Why?

Such a survey promises to enrich our understanding of key safety risks related to conscious AI in several ways.

📊 Most importantly, the results of this survey provide a general picture of experts’ views about the probability, promises, & perils of AI consciousness.

• This summary can be used to gauge expert opinion, & make it easier for policymakers, journalists, & lay people to see where the experts stand, where they disagree, & where there is uncertainty.
• Furthermore, the survey results can also be of use to experts themselves, who may harbour misconceptions about what most other experts believe, or, owing to their specialisation, may not be abreast of advances in other areas of AI research.
• Overall, the survey enhances the accessibility of AI research, ultimately contributing to a more AI-literate (& hence, better prepared) populace.

⚔️ Analysing the types of answers given by respondents might help to identify fault lines between industry, academia, & policy.

📈 Repeating the survey on an annual basis can assist in monitoring trends (e.g. updates in belief in response to technological advances/breakthroughs, differences in attitudes between industry & academia, emergent policy levers, etc.).