Obviously it is better at stuff it's seen in its training data, but that's same for all humans, and likely universal for all forms of intelligence. The question

Obviously it is better at stuff it's seen in its training data, but that's same for all humans, and likely universal for all forms of intelligence. The question about AGI and the possibility of LLM's and such being more than regurgitation of the training set isn't whether or not after a certain number of compute cycles that the model can model a part of the natural world or some real process with X degree of accuracy, but rather that it can reliably improve on its failures on its own. This is what humans can do. No human however can spit out a video of SORA's quality from their brain alone, and those who can require decades of training with specific video rendering tools. Ask someone to render a video of a man walking in a city and they will internally reference their millions of impressions of the human face and body and millions of impressions of what a cityscape looks like. Ask them to invent a novel form of transportation and create a video of it, most humans short of the exceptionally creative will struggle, just as SORA likely would. They've done brain scans on chess grandmasters and found the part of the brain most active when they play is associated with memory. Memory is the scaffolding upon which the more information dense elements of the natural world and complex processes can be understood. Via these scaffolds of memory as single elements, new connections and abstractions can form. It took the world of fine arts centuries to go beyond merely depicting things in real life (the Renaissance to Impressionism).