> If you showed someone what our computers can do with the latest LLMs now to someone 5 years ago they would probably say it sure looks a lot like AGI.

Would they? Perhaps if you only showed them glossy demos that obscure all the ways in which LLMs fail catastrophically and are very obviously nowhere even close to AGI.

Certainly, they wouldn't expect that an AI able to score 150 on an IQ test is unable to play a casual game of chess because it isn't coherent enough to play without making illegal moves.

▲

bykhun 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> Certainly, they wouldn't expect that an AI able to score 150 on an IQ test is unable to play a casual game of chess because it isn't coherent enough to play without making illegal moves.

To be fair, I am pretty sure Claude Code will download and run stockfish, if you task it to play chess with you. It's not like a human who read 100 books about chess, but never played, would be able to play well with their eyes closed, and someone whispering board position into their ear

	▲	root_axis 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There are a lot of problems with this analogy, but even if you were to take a photo of the board after every move and send it to the model, it would still be unable to play competently.