What's his estimate of how far we are from a definition of AGI?

balder1991 a day ago | parent | next [-]

The only relevant definition for them: https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/26/microsoft-and-openai-have-...

chasd00 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I wonder if like an inverse definition would work. If a user has root/admin access and all permissions/authority needed to command an AI to list the files in a directory and it simply refuses, would that be a sign of intelligence?

▲

password54321 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Can perform out of distribution tasks at least around average human level performance.

▲

benzible a day ago | parent [-]

Every attempt to formally define "general intelligence" for humans has been a shitshow. IQ tests were literally designed to justify excluding immigrants and sterilizing the "feeble-minded." Modern psychometrics can't agree on whether intelligence is one thing (g factor) or many things, whether it's measurable across cultures, or whether the tests measure aptitude or just familiarity with test-taking and middle-class cultural norms.

Now we're trying to define AGI - artificial general intelligence - when we can't even define the G, much less the I. Is it "general" because it works across domains? Okay, how many domains? Is it "general" because it can learn new tasks? How quickly? With how much training data?

The goalposts have already moved a dozen times. GPT-2 couldn't do X, so X was clearly a requirement for AGI. Now models can do X, so actually X was never that important, real AGI needs Y. It's a vibes-based marketing term - like "artificial intelligence" was (per John McCarthy himself) - not a coherent technical definition.

	▲	password54321 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think you are overthinking this. The ARC benchmark for fluid abstracting reasoning was made in 2019 and it still hasn't been 'solved'. So the goalposts aren't moving as much as you think they are. LLMs or neural nets have never been good with out of distribution tasks.

▲

SJC_Hacker a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

True AGI will be able to improve itself without human intervention or even guidance

	▲	nextworddev a day ago \| parent [-]
		assuming it's "aligned" with a foundational model lab

▲

oytis 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The best definition so far is that it's something that will make a hundred billion dollar for Sam Altman.

	▲	baobun a day ago \| parent [-]
		That's unironially basically what Altman's defined it as in public.