I've been saying this for years now. LLMs are _not_ the right methodology to get to AGI. My friends who were drinking the kool-aid are only recently coming around to "hey, this might not get us AGI".

But sometimes it feels like I'm the lone voice in a bubble where people are convinced AGI is just around the corner.

I'm wondering if it's because people are susceptible to the marketing, or are just doing some type of 'wishful thinking' - as some seem genuinely interested in AGI.

Yeah I've had those conversations since GPT-3 first came out. I usually look like the one way off base, but I never did hear a clear explanation of how the LLM architecture could lead to AGI.

In my experience it was a combination of the hype and an overconfidence in the person's understanding of how LLMs work and what AGI actually means. To be fair, AGI definitions are all over the place and LLMs were rarely described in detail beyond "its AI that read the whole internet and sounds like a human."