In my opinion, this essentially touches upon the old problem of anthropomorphism, here in connection with radical constructivism, more precisely: social constructivism and the capacity for attachment.

These are fundamentally socio-philosophical questions, but none that actually correspond to reality—because no matter how much one might wish that one's car had consciousness and would be grateful for the next oil change and constant polishing, objectively speaking, it is and remains—despite all epistemological limitations—a machine.

The problem isn't that, but rather that humans are capable of establishing emotional relationships even with inanimate or nonexistent things, and from this kind of relationship arises the desire to attribute more properties to the emotionally attached object than are objectively present.

A rather trivial insight, I think. Constructing a debate about the consciousness of a collection of algorithms from this only confirms it.