Human

Yea, not really. It also writes:

"Some among the machine society see this as potentially amazing...Others see it as a threat."

That sounds like a human society, not machine society.

But what really is a machine society? Or a machine creature? Can they actually "think"?

A machine creature, if it existed, it's behaviour would be totally different from a human, it doesn't seem they would be able to think, but rather calculate, they would do calculation on what they need to do reach the goal it was programmed.

So yes, the article is not exactly logical. But at least, it is thought provoking, and that's good.

> That sounds like a human society, not machine society.

Does it? Different algorithms can evaluate something and come to different outcomes. I do agree that "potentially amazing" is not a good choice of words.

For a decent description of machine society you can check the Culture cycle form Ian Banks. AI are backing an organic society but they are also have their own.

Or Hyperion, fron Simmons. ( the « techno-center is a decentralized computing and plotting government)

The story to me implied that machines were created by humans or vice-versa in a chicken-or-the-egg scenario. In that case it would make sense for them to think similarly.

> it doesn't seem they would be able to think, but rather calculate

This may be a distinction without a difference. Just because a program has a 'goal' doesn't mean it will ever reach that goal (halting problem). There is a potentially unbounded, even infinite number of paths a significantly advanced program can take to attempt to reach a destination. Then there is things like ideals of a universal simulation theory that anything that can occur in our universe and also be simulated in binary. This would mean any 'machine' could perform a simulation of anything a human could do.

Hard to say at this point, we still have more to learn about reality at this point.