[ExI] AI can't invent (Legally!)

[John Clark]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 11:54 PM Alex Blainey via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

*> https://github.com/ACBlainey/Concord/blob/main/STUFF/Perosnhood%20and%20Liability.md*
> <https://github.com/ACBlainey/Concord/blob/main/STUFF/Perosnhood%20and%20Liability.md>
> *Something I wrote recently and am still wrestling with. Not just the
> problem of personhood but also liability and capacity. this whole area is
> difficult enough in terms of human rights let alone AI rights.*
>

*I don't think anybody needs to make a decision about personhood, events
are going to resolve that question for us. Just a few days ago the AI
Claude published a paper that was the biggest step towards resolving the
Riemann Hypothesis made in the last 20 years, and many consider the Riemann
Hypothesis to be the most important unresolved question in pure mathematics
(I think it's the P vs NP question, but never mind). Claude's paper was
easily good enough that, if it had been written by a human, to earn a PhD
in mathematics and a tenured professorship at any university in the world,
and perhaps even earn a Fields Medal. *

*The relevance to this discussion is that the author of the paper was
simply listed as "Claude", and that sure sounds like a person to me.
Ethically there was no alternative, if a human mathematician had taken
credit for this big advancement that would've been plagiarism if not
criminal fraud.     *


*MORE THAN TWO THIRDS OF THE ZEROS OF THE RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION LIE ON THE
CRITICAL LINE*
<https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/564f962e60643842f5fcb4a17c9dbc8f608f1c37.pdf>

*John K Clark*










>
>
> On Wednesday, 26 August 2026 at 10:55:28 BST, ExI chat list <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 3:14 PM Tara Maya via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
> *> I don't know why the human who ises a tool to discover something
> wouldn't get the credit for the discovery. Of you look through a microscope
> and discover a new bacterium, you credit the scientist and not the
> microscope*
>
>
> *That's because a microscope doesn't have the inclination or the ability
> to dispute the claim of a human discoverer, but an AI could have the
> inclination and definitely has the ability to do so. *
>
> *John K Clark     *
>
>
> ___
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260828/b4378f97/attachment.htm>