Your definition of "sentience" appears to be "optimization". I'm not sure many philosophers will agree with you, but it's a valid stand-point I guess. But imho just defining things this way doesn't really add anything to the discussion, it just makes it about semantics.
(Which I suppose in some sense the discussion is fundamentally about semantics, what does sentience even mean, but I think most people would agree that it refers to something a little beyond your definition here. Redefining it away does not solve the issue.)
> Your definition of "sentience" appears to be "optimization"
My definition of sentience was given in my comment. It isn't optimization, it's:
* Self awareness. Some level of ability to understand what you are and how you work.
* Emergent emotion. Displays of things like fear and happiness.
It isn't semantics, it's real behavior. Being a self optimizer leads to those two things. Sentience isn't optimization, but to be able to self optimize leads to sentience.
(Which I suppose in some sense the discussion is fundamentally about semantics, what does sentience even mean, but I think most people would agree that it refers to something a little beyond your definition here. Redefining it away does not solve the issue.)