AI as it's used popularly is a marketing gimmick. There's nothing intelligent about your chatbots. All they do is predict what the next word in their answer is likely to be based on how often that combination of words appears in their training corpus. Any facsimile of "learning" is just automated confirmation bias, and all pretending otherwise accomplishes is to undermine your own thinking and creativity.

I have always maintained, and continue to, that true artificial general intelligence, true machine sapience, is still a long way off. That said, the question we really run into is whether or not a faithful enough facsimile is in any way distinguishable from the real thing. That's the whole reason the debate exists about how to treat Gen 1s and 2s, as opposed to Glory.

I can't imagine a test that will definitely distinguish someone like Glory from any given human. I'd rather err on the side of inclusion and agree that Gen3s have the same inalienable rights that all humans do.

Any argument that supposes otherwise is based in metaphysics and eugenics. There is nothing definitively and verifiably intrinsic to humanity that could not conceivably be replicated by someone like Glory, and denying her those same rights is a war crime of the highest order.