I see the attempted point of the analogy all right. I simply disagree that there's anything profound in it. Yes, any creature that appears before us and demonstrates the ability to empathize and feel and understand and intentionally alter its place in the world deserves an extension of human rights.
Why appreciating this requires comparison to a machine or science fiction or a computer -- that, I fail to see. It's ethically imminent in humanity itself, which is the closest thing to a miracle I've ever seen or heard about, and this point has been recognized and recognizable for much longer than there have been so-called AI computer devices, which seem to me to be dragging otherwise open and productive minds into twisted fits of commodity fetishism. Nothing that's ever come out of a computer is anything but a simple additive result of what various people have put into them. Speculate about that changing if you want to, but I saw "Herbie the Lovebug" when I was 5. Twaddle in, twaddle out.
Meanwhile, if trying to concoct deep new wisdom from thinking about computers is what a person does for play, I'd say that person needs to learn how to play for real.