> I feel like most of human endeavor will soon be just about trying to continuously show that AI's don't have AGI.

I think you overestimate how much your average person-on-the-street cares about LLM benchmarks. They already treat ChatGPT or whichever as generally intelligent (including to their own detriment), are frustrated about their social media feeds filling up with slop and, maybe, if they're white-collar, worry about their jobs disappearing due to AI. Apart from a tiny minority in some specific field, people already know themselves to be less intelligent along any measurable axis than someone somewhere.

Soon they can drop the bioweapon to welcome our replacement.

"AGI" doesn't mean anything concrete, so it's all a bunch of non-sequiturs. Your goalposts don't exist.

Anyone with any sense is interested in how well these tools work and how they can be harnessed, not some imaginary milestone that is not defined and cannot be measured.