[AndrewKemendo]

Uh, I go to the same conferences - in fact I'll be at AGI 16 this year and I was at AGI 14. Ben was my research advisor for my Masters.

I stand by my statements. The community, or even a handful of researchers haven't come up with a competent path to AGI. That's indisputable.

it's not like we have no idea how to build a general intelligence, or what such an architecture might look like

Show me one, I'd love to see it.

Listen, I love everyone working on them and many are my friends; but none of the attempts today have anything near the specificity of a project management roadmap to say with any certainty that AGI is even a probable outcome. Not OpenCOG, not Numenta, not MicroPsi.

That's not a hit on any of them either. The people and areas they are working on are awesome, amazing and fundamental to research but none of them would claim that they have a solid roadmap. Even the roadmap sessions at the conferences usually go nowhere because we just don't know enough about how generalizable intelligence works yet.

[maaku]

> I stand by my statements. The community, or even a handful of researchers haven't come up with a competent path to AGI. That's indisputable.

The keyword there is competent. You're making a subjective evaluation. Given your CV you must surely be aware that Goertzel has a 1,000 page book (two volumes, actually) laying out in great detail his roadmap to human-level intelligence. The leaders of other major projects in this space have their own ideas which they talk freely about at the AGI conferences, and are written down to varying degrees.

[argonaut]

> book... roadmap... ideas

Notice a pattern?

Meanwhile, in deep learning (and FWIW I don't think any deep learning researchers are under the illusion deep learning provides a path to AGI), there are:

working systems that outperform humans at narrow visual tasks (image classification, segmentation, etc.), a working Go bot, early prototype systems that caption images, the list goes on and on.