AGI-level systems are now attainable while much of the economy being built around them still follows a fundamentally pre-AGI model, creating tools for humans rather than organizations designed around autonomous…
58 comments
The thing they never seem to want to talk about is how the world already has several billion instances of non-artificial general intelligence. And, while they can collectively do quite a lot of different tasks, each one is only competent to do a vanishingly small percentage of all possible tasks. And that it usually takes quite a lot of work to get them to the point of being able to independently perform most of the interesting tasks. Because if we did talk about that then we'd have to start answering questions about why we expect artificial intelligence not to also be like that.
We like to emphasize the stupid part and use that as proof agi hasn't arrived because it's comforting. Don't want to look at it while it eats us alive.
ASI is not here, but AGI is.
A few years back if you asked me to build a system and just name the price, my question would be: What should it be able to answer? Whatever i want. I wouldn't have an idea how to build a system like this.
Today we do.
Would you add any context to your comment to even have an argument we can discuss?
But if that's AGI then it's a meaningless term; it's just a martketing gimmick. Which is entirely my point.
Like the very programmers who code with AI and no longer type code are saying AGI hasn't arrived.
It arrived years ago. And people are still in denial because it's on track to eat our identities as programmers.
"Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a hypothetical type of artificial intelligence that matches or surpasses human capabilities across virtually all cognitive tasks.[1] Unlike artificial narrow intelligence (ANI), whose competence is confined to well‑defined tasks, an AGI system can generalise knowledge, transfer skills between domains, and solve novel problems without task‑specific reprogramming."
I would argue that its not that relevant anymore what specific AGI definition you follow. The impact is already significant and real, progress hasn't stoped and the current chatbots can do arbitrary things without task-specific reprogramming.
Depending on the context size and your problem, i can also teach an chatbot new things adhoc without reprogramming.
Programmers think that because a slick piece of software is really good at writing code, it must obviously be really good at everything else. Nothing is more complex than the big brain shit they've been doing their whole lives.
And it did. Not by using a music OCR tool, but by inventing one.
No one is spending millions training frontier LLMs on symphony scores or literary fiction. But at this point I'm fairly sure they'd get workable results if they did.
I've been tracking music in AI for more than a decade, and this is the first time I've been able to say that.
I'd argue we can't align humans to neccessarily degree to ensure even semi stable future. Or nations, or corporations.
Intelligence isn't magic. It can only overcome so much brute force and humanity, as a non-intelligent system made out of intelligent parts, carries an ungodly amount of brute force.