but nobody who actually understands how this shit works (and doesn’t have a vested interest in lying about it to the public) would suggest it’s capable of gaining sentience.

Why is that? All I see is arguments misrepresenting how it works (see my earlier comment and the linked source) to try to say that it is certainly not capable of that without necessary elaboration.

It’s something you shouldn’t let people suggest as a serious possibility at this point.

You're saying this as though it has been conclusively debunked, which backs up what I'm saying wrt what the goalposts are here: there is no such certainty. Arguing that the issue is uncertain is not a semantic game.