I'm suggesting that we fund research into the problem of AGI. I'm not saying that we should be funding teams to code up someone's personal AGI hypothesis. In th

I'm suggesting that we fund research into the problem of AGI. I'm not saying that we should be funding teams to code up someone's personal AGI hypothesis. In the past, too much attention has been focused on trying to code up an AI without any real justification for why that AI system would work, and this has led to the failures you cite. What we need is fundamental research into intelligence, theories that describe intelligence and how to attain it. This is how research progresses in other fields; rocket scientists do not come up with their personal favorite hypothesis of rocket propulsion then seek funding to try to build a rocket using that propulsion system. Instead, they form models and consistent theories to validate their hypotheses before actually attempting to build a rocket. Why should AI research be any different? If the implicit assumption is that general intelligence is fundamentally just too difficult to understand, I disagree, and have not seen a convincing argument making that case.