I don't think AGI is right around the corner

Anyone who claims that a poorly definined concept, AGI, is right around the corner is most likely:

- trying to sell something

- high on their own stories

- high on exogenous compounds

- all of the above

LLMs are good at language. They are OK summarizers of text by design but not good at logic. Very poor at spatial reasoning and as a result poor at connecting concepts together.

Just ask any of the crown jewel LLM models "What's the biggest unsolved problem in the [insert any] field".

The usual result is a pop-science-level article but with ton of subtle yet critical mistakes! Even worse, the answer sounds profound on the surface. In reality, it's just crap.

Interesting. I think the key to what you wrote is "poorly definined".

I find LLMs to be generally intelligent. So I feel like "we are already there" -- by some definition of AGI. At least how I think of it.

Maybe a lot of people think of AGI as "superhuman". And by that definition, we are not there -- and may not get there.

But, for me, we are already at the era of AGI.