logoalt Hacker News

LordDragonfangyesterday at 2:53 AM2 repliesview on HN

The definition has already been stretched to not fit the previous models. There is no meaningful, static definition that significantly predates current capabilities.

There's a reason why ai xrisk doomers had to come up with the term ASI.

I would seriously suggest that everyone take a look at the wikipedia page for AGI from the month before ChatGPT was released, compare it to the current version, and not come to that conclusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Artificial_genera...


Replies

FromTheFirstInyesterday at 3:34 AM

The first sentence is “understand or learn any intellectual task that a human can.” Whatever you think of the benefits of LLMs, they don’t understand and they can only learn during the training period and with very minor adjustments in post training. So, no I don’t think any of these models are generally intelligent.

show 1 reply
mellosoulsyesterday at 10:04 AM

From that same page:

Various criteria for intelligence have been proposed (most famously the Turing test) but to date, there is no definition that satisfies everyone