By the most-accepted definition of AGI, if it's stupid sometimes, it's not AGI. At least, not if it's stupid as often as LLMs are.

This is why I kind of hate the term though. We generally agree that humans are intelligent even though they're also pretty damn stupid.

For example, one of the stupid things we do is fail to realize that "intelligent" is a word with multiple senses. Which then makes a muddle of conversations like this because we all - myself included - tend to switch back and forth between senses of the term without even realizing we're doing it. So we have sense A of "intelligent", which means something like "capable of abstract reasoning". And we have sense B of "intelligent", which means something more like "the opposite of stupid". These two meanings don't actually have much to do with each other. But a lot of the hype around LLMs and the possibility of them being a form of AGI tends to hinge on tacitly assuming that an artificial system that can do abstract reasoning tasks won't do stupid things, simply because sense A has one characteristic, sense B has the other, and we happen to use the same word to describe both.