4 ms·
There is no reliable evidence they won’t. Look at rate of progress, not today’s capabilities alone. The gap is shrinking, many tasks are already performed at
by mirekrusin 2mo ago
There is no reliable evidence they won’t.
Look at rate of progress, not today’s capabilities alone.
The gap is shrinking, many tasks are already performed at super human level.
Humanity doesn’t have monopoly on intelligence - it seems obvious to me it’ll be reached and surpassed without hard upper limit.
- nradov 2mo agoOK well then let's check back here in a few years to see if any of them managed to build an AGI. Until then it's just idle speculation. Anything could happen ... or not.
- mapontosevenths 2mo agoFirst, both of you must agree on one definition of AGI. I'd be willing to wager that you can't.
- DrewADesign 2mo agoAnd I’ll bet someone made a comment exactly like yours here, a couple of years ago… and guess what definitely didn’t happen?
- zargon 2mo agohttps://xkcd.com/605/ https://xkcd.com/605/
- mirekrusin 2mo agoI think we have more than 1 data point for AI progress.
- nradov 2mo agoWe have zero data points for AGI progress.
- mirekrusin 2mo agoProgress is defined by capability data points over time that we have plenty where AGI is a threshold ie. stuff like METR [0] and dozens of others. [0] https://metr.org/time-horizons https://metr.org/time-horizons
- nradov 2mo agoNone of those are AGI data point points. LLMs are making terrific progress but it's unknown whether they're progressing towards true AGI or in some other direction.
- mirekrusin 2mo agoWhat would be an AGI data point?