I agree with the sentiment of the researchers, that it's merely showing "sparks" of AGI. Of course, it depends on how you define "intelligence", but I think to

I agree with the sentiment of the researchers, that it's merely showing "sparks" of AGI. Of course, it depends on how you define "intelligence", but I think too many people get caught up on certain technical details, like those saying "it just generates one word at a time." Yes, these models fundamentally operate very different from our brains, but I think it's naïve and ignorant to believe they're not at least a little bit intelligent. I don't think this current generation of AI is going to close the gap to human-level intelligence. I don't think they can just keep throwing more and more training data to solve the problems and shortcomings of these AIs. I think it's going to require new machine learning algorithms and techniques to close that gap, and it's going to take time for researchers to discover these new algorithms and techniques. We're seeing rapid progress now, simply because it's new and novel technology, and I think these models will continue to improve but at a much slower rate within several months.