Anthropomorphizing current AIs is the only way to reason about them, explain them to laypeople, or predict them well.

Drawn from what Zvi Mowshowitz said

What Zvi Mowshowitz actually said

Do you hold this korrent?Do you also believe this?

Cannot both be true

LLM intelligence should not be understood through an animal analogy; it is a different kind of entity altogether

Mowshowitz says anthropomorphising these systems is NECESSARY to reason about, explain and predict their behaviour accurately. Karpathy says LLM intelligence should not be understood through an animal analogy at all, because it is a different kind of entity. One says the human frame is the working tool; the other that it is the mistake.
In tension with

AI sentience is a category error, and the chances of AIs being sentient are vanishingly small.

Cowen says AI systems are not sentient and that the odds of it are vanishingly small. Mowshowitz says anthropomorphising them is how you predict them accurately. Predicting a thing by treating it as a mind does not require it to be one, and the two claims sit uneasily together anyway, because the frame that works keeps being taken as evidence.

Shared subject first, then similar wording. They may agree or disagree.