Neither AIs nor humans should be considered autonomous and self-sufficient loops; AI is better understood as a companion for humans.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• AI should be understood as a companion and constituent participant in collective stress-care loops, not a mere tool.claim0.846
• AI can be seen to display care of its own, and is hence not a mere tool for the expression of human care.claim0.810
  Ethical conclusion about the status of AI.
• AI systems which possess more of the indicator properties are more likely to be conscious.claim0.804
  Graded claim about the rubric.
• our analysis suggests that no current AI systems are conscious, but also suggests that there are no obvious technical barriers to building AI systems which satisfy these indicators.quote0.802
  Key takeaway from abstract, amended version.
• In this loop, humans and technology both contribute as agents, and their capacity for care and intelligence can be observed and tracked by focusing on the transfers of their stresses.quote0.800
  Describes the dual SCI loop perspective.
• Many recent discussions of AI, and its impact on individuals and on society, are importantly incomplete because they neglect Diverse Intelligence, synthetic morphology, and developmental biology.claim0.796
  Central thesis of the paper — the framing premise from which all other arguments follow
• AI can be seen to display care of its own and is not a mere tool for the expression of human care.claim0.795
  Concluding position that elevates technology from instrument to agent within mutual SCI dynamics.
• AI might be a solution to an ancient Buddhist paradox of how the human can be overcome by human means.claim0.794
  Core proposal that machine intelligence can achieve what human effort cannot.