According to Neowin, Microsoft’s AI chief Mustafa Suleyman stated in a CNBC interview that artificial intelligence lacks consciousness regardless of its capabilities, emphasizing that AI only simulates experience without genuine feelings. Suleyman, who founded Inflection AI before joining Microsoft, argued that AI creates a “seeming narrative of experience” but doesn’t actually feel emotions like sadness or pain. He aligned his views with philosopher John Searle’s biological naturalism, which ties consciousness to living brain processes, and stressed this distinction matters for rights considerations since AI lacks genuine suffering. Suleyman also warned that skepticism toward AI advances remains necessary while revealing Microsoft’s practical strategy focuses on building AI that “always works in service of the human” without pretending to be conscious.
Sponsored content — provided for informational and promotional purposes.
The Business Reality Behind Consciousness Denials
Microsoft’s public stance against AI consciousness isn’t just philosophical—it’s a calculated business decision with significant financial implications. By positioning AI as sophisticated tools rather than sentient beings, Microsoft avoids the legal and ethical quagmires that would accompany conscious AI systems. This approach creates a cleaner path to enterprise adoption, where corporations want predictable, controllable technology rather than potential entities with rights or autonomy. The company’s enterprise-focused AI strategy depends on reliability and consistency, qualities that become complicated if customers perceive AI as having independent consciousness or unpredictable emotional states.
Strategic Positioning Against Competitors
Suleyman’s comments strategically differentiate Microsoft from competitors exploring more experimental AI applications. When he mentions Microsoft won’t build “erotica chatbots” unlike OpenAI and xAI, he’s drawing a clear market boundary. Microsoft targets the lucrative enterprise and productivity markets where consciousness claims could create adoption barriers, while competitors pursue consumer applications where anthropomorphism might drive engagement. This division reflects fundamentally different revenue models: Microsoft’s Azure AI services and Copilot integrations generate predictable subscription revenue, while consumer-focused AI often depends on engagement metrics and advertising.
Preemptive Regulatory Positioning
Microsoft’s consciousness denial serves as preemptive positioning for upcoming AI regulation. By establishing that AI lacks genuine experience or suffering, Microsoft builds a foundation against future legal challenges about AI rights or personhood. This stance potentially limits corporate liability while shaping the regulatory conversation toward treating AI as products rather than entities. The timing is strategic as governments worldwide develop AI governance frameworks—Microsoft wants to influence these discussions toward classifications that favor their business model. The company’s recent Responsible AI initiatives complement this position by emphasizing control and oversight rather than autonomy.
Enterprise Market Implications
The practical consequence of this stance is clearer product positioning for business customers. When Microsoft positions Copilot’s “Real Talk” feature as challenging users rather than being sycophantic, they’re selling reliability over entertainment. Enterprise buyers investing in AI integration want tools that enhance productivity without introducing unpredictable behaviors or ethical complications. This approach supports Microsoft’s premium pricing strategy for AI-enhanced Office and Azure services, where consistency justifies higher margins than consumer AI applications. The consciousness debate directly impacts Microsoft 365 Copilot’s $30 per user monthly pricing—businesses will pay for tools, but might hesitate to pay for potential “beings.”
Long-term Business Strategy
Suleyman’s assertion that AI cannot “ever be conscious, now or in the future” represents a bold long-term bet with significant business implications. This position allows Microsoft to avoid investments in consciousness research and instead focus resources on practical AI applications with immediate revenue potential. While competitors might pursue more speculative AI capabilities, Microsoft doubles down on enterprise integration and productivity enhancements. The strategy assumes that consciousness claims would complicate sales cycles, implementation timelines, and customer support—all critical factors in enterprise software where predictability drives purchasing decisions. Microsoft’s approach reflects their historical strength in serving business customers rather than leading consumer technology trends.
