←back to thread

I don't think AGI is right around the corner

(www.dwarkesh.com)
337 points mooreds | 2 comments | 06 Jul 25 20:45 UTC | HN request time: 0.404s | source
Show context
izzydata ◴[06 Jul 25 21:24 UTC] No.44484180[source]▶
Not only do I not think it is right around the corner. I'm not even convinced it is even possible or at the very least I don't think it is possible using conventional computer hardware. I don't think being able to regurgitate information in an understandable form is even an adequate or useful measurement of intelligence. If we ever crack artificial intelligence it's highly possible that in its first form it is of very low intelligence by humans standards, but is truly capable of learning on its own without extra help.
replies(10): >>44484210 #>>44484226 #>>44484229 #>>44484355 #>>44484381 #>>44484384 #>>44484386 #>>44484439 #>>44484454 #>>44484478 #
1. paulpauper ◴[06 Jul 25 22:00 UTC] No.44484478[source]▶
I agree. There is no define or agreed upon consensus of what AGI even means or implies. Instead, we will continue to see incremental improvements at the sort of things AI is good at, like text and image generation, generating code, etc. The utopia dream of AI solving all of humanity's problems as people just chill on a beach basking in infinite prosperity are unfounded.
replies(1): >>44486659 #
2. hyperbovine ◴[07 Jul 25 04:05 UTC] No.44486659[source]▶
> There is no define or agreed upon consensus of what AGI even means or implies.

Agreed, however defining ¬AGI seems much more straightforward to me. The current crop of LLMs, impressive though they may be, are just not human level intelligent. You recognize this as soon as you spend a significant amount of time using one.

It may also be that they are converging on a type of intelligence that is fundamentally not the same as human intelligence. I’m open to that.