See my previous notes on this subject. We agree. I've said I don't think that AGI in unachievable, but we will discover the cure for cancer far before we discover AGI. AGI is nothing like LLMs we currently have. What we have is predictive text running on a machine with lots of compute having seen billions of examples to feed us a response. That's NOTHING like what AGI will look like. If you think AGI is around the corner, you must also think we're about to cure cancer in a few months. The compute required for the former, is an order or magnitude more than what is required for the latter.  

 Absolutely agree. The idea that an LLM is anything close to AGI is maddening to me. 

 People want an AGI for *judgment* which is different than say for doing multivariable calculus. 

The same people who so eagerly outsourced their own judgment to laughably flawed “experts” the last few years are the ones in whom the fantasy is the strongest.  

 Dude, yes… I see people pin all sorts of hopes and desires on AGI and it really disturbs me if I’m being honest. 

 I said, and try ot be clear about my wording more recently, "the intelligence explosion is in our very near future," not AGI. I increasingly think "AGI" suffers from a fundamental semantic problem of being undefinable.