Very few. One of the PCs in the first campaign ended up in a marriage-like relationship with an AI robot who had been built as an unsuccessful¹ pilot program to achieve immortality through mind emulation. He was programmed capable of suffering and joy, and everyone treated him as though he counted as a person. But artificial human-like minds are rare, and therefore expensive, because there isn’t really a lot of use for them, given how plentiful humans are. The artificial intelligences that are programmed are made for particular purposes that human cognition cannot perform well, and are therefore commonly very, very un-humanlike. Most aren’t capable of suffering, because why would anyone make them so?
You see, intelligence doesn’t exist. Also, there is no Self.
Human cognitive function is not a single or integrated process taking place in the mind. Studies of people with localised brain injuries and of the results of temporarily activating or de-activating particular parts of the brain e.g. with magnetic fields, split-brain experiments, and so forth, show that the human “mind” consists of the aggregation of a number of more-or-less separate processes separately localised in the brain. The search for a common “general intelligence” that is involved in all of them seems doomed, and it is now clear that the human mind does not work by applying a general faculty of abstract intelligence to diverse problems². Rather, there is in the human brain a considerable collection of different faculties that deal with different subjects.
Those faculties are adapted to managing human life in the ancestral environment. They are good for hunting prey, keeping track of resources in an environment that changes with recognisable trends, making stuff with the hands, specialising and exchanging, managing social relationships, managing a sex life, negotiating, making, keeping, and breaking agreements, attracting the good opinion or compliance others, conserving attention, conserving memory, running, throwing things, fighting, deterring trespasses and betrayals, conserving energy, rationalising, judging people, deflecting blame. The part of the human mind that appears to be the Self is just one of these. Its function seems to be to present an account of our motivations and behaviour to other people. There is reason to believe that it confabulates.
If you build an artificial intelligence for any purpose other than emulating a human mind (which is a pointless stunt) most of these faculties will be useless or worse, and you will leave them out. And for a lot of practical uses AIs will require cognitive faculties that humans just never evolved.
WEIRD³s have a lot wrapped up in why humans count and other animals don’t. We keep shifting the goalposts about it, as chimps, crows, elephants, dogs⁴ etc. are shown to possess the capabilities that we have declared make us unique and important in a succession of fallings-back to unprepared positions. I hope that eventually we will be forced to concede that what matters is the capacity to suffer. But when we program AIs there will be no need to include that.
So in summary: in Flat Black a lot of the things that we expect will require true artificial intelligence capable of abstract reasoning turn out to be done better by pattern recognition and dumb expert systems. High performance on cognitive tasks turns out to be uncorrelated with self-awareness or “sapience”, or even in most practical applications with a capacity for abstract thought. Most useful AIs are highly specialised, utterly inhuman, incapable of suffering or joy, and not equipped to persuade humans that their interests matter. There’s just no reason to program them any other way.
¹ It was unsuccessful in that the uploading process was not fatal, and the original person was not resolute enough to suicide after the procedure.
² There is a lovely demonstration of this involving two problems that are abstractly the same. People find the puzzle difficult which it is posed in terms of cards that have a number on one side and a letter on the other, and usually get it wrong. When the same puzzle is posed in terms of people who might be under or over legal drinking age and whose drinks might be alcoholic or non-alcohol people find it easy and most get it right.
³ People whose backgrounds are Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich,and Democratic.
⁴ At the moment we’re up to “self-awareness”, defined as the ability to recognise one’s own reflection in a mirror. Elephants didn’t have it until someone thought of making the mirrors big enough; now they do. Dogs don’t have it at the moment because they don’t react to their reflection having a spot on its face, but I have seen a dog react purposefully to seeing that its reflection was about to get its tail stepped on. So there.