Could an AI have conscious experiences? Any answer to this question should conform to Evidentialism - that is, it should be based not on intuition, dogma or speculation but on solid scientific evidence. I argue that such evidence is hard to come by and that the only justifiable stance on the prospects of artificial consciousness is agnosticism. In the current debate, the main division is between biological views that are sceptical of artificial consciousness and functional views that are sympathetic to it. I argue that both camps make the same mistake of over-estimating what the evidence tells us. Scientific insights into consciousness have been achieved through the study of conscious organisms. Although this has enabled cautious assessments of consciousness in various creatures, extending this to AI faces serious obstacles. AI thus presents consciousness researchers with a dilemma: either reach a verdict on artificial consciousness but violate Evidentialism; or respect Evidentialism but offer no verdict on the prospects of artificial consciousness. The dominant trend in the literature has been to take the first option while purporting to follow the scientific evidence. I argue that if we truly follow the evidence, we must take the second option and adopt agnosticism.

This paper introduces a method to generate highly selective encodings that can be magnetically "programmed" onto physical modules to enable them to self-assemble in chosen configurations. We generate these encodings based on Hadamard matrices, and show how to design the faces of modules to be maximally attractive to their intended mate, while remaining maximally agnostic to other faces. We derive guarantees on these bounds, and verify their attraction and agnosticism experimentally. Using cubic modules whose faces have been covered in soft magnetic material, we show how inexpensive, passive modules with planar faces can be used to selectively self-assemble into target shapes without geometric guides. We show that these modules can be easily re-programmed for new target shapes using a CNC-based magnetic plotter, and demonstrate self-assembly of 8 cubes in a water tank.

This brief paper explores the consequences of agnosticism with respect to whether a given human agent B is guilty of fraud. We find that if a human A is agnostic with respect to whether a human fraudster B is guilty of fraud, A, on the only formal definition of fraud that we are aware of, is her/himself provably not guilty of fraud. This means that a counter-fraud machine D based on an implemented version of this definition will classify A as innocent. Hence, if A by simply an act of will can bring it about that A is agnostic, A will evade D