Well, you should show the proof that it is possible also, So it would be a draw.

I really think it is not possible to get that from a machine. You can improve and do much fancier than now.

But AGI would be something entirely different. It is a system that can do everything better than a human including creativity, which I believe it to be exclusively human as of now.

It can combine, simulate and reason. But think out of the box? I doubt so. It is different to being able to derive ideas from which human would create. For that it can be useful. But that would not be AGI.

▲

jibal 2 days ago | parent [-]

The burden of proof is on the person who makes a claim, especially an absolute existential claim like that. You have failed the burden of proof and of intellectual honesty. Over and out.

	▲	germandiago a day ago \| parent [-]
		You make the claim that AGI can exist, right? I make the claim it cannot. Both are claims, try to not manipulate the language. I acknowledge I started this but there is not a position that is better than the other.