The "G" in "AGI" stands for "General".

While quickly I noticed that my pre-ChatGPT-3.5 use of the term was satisfied by ChatGPT-3.5, this turned out to be completely useless for 99% of discussions, as everyone turned out to have different boolean cut-offs for not only the generality, but also the artificiality and the intelligence, and also what counts as "intelligence" in the first place.

That everyone can pick a different boolean cut-off for each initial, means they're not really booleans.

Therefore, consider that this can't drive a car, so it's not fully general. And even those AI which can drive a car, can't do so in genuinely all conditions expected of a human, just most of them. Stuff like that.

▲

throw310822 a day ago | parent [-]

> consider that this can't drive a car, so it's not fully general

So blind people are not general intelligences?

	▲	AxEy a day ago \| parent [-]
		A blind person does not have the necessary input (sight data) to make the necessary computation. A car autopilot would. So no we do not deem a blind person to be unintelligent due to their lack of being able to drive without sight. But we might judge a sighted person as being not generally intelligent if they could not drive with sight.