[jasfi]

AGI can solve problems in any general context using its capabilities, including problems never seen before.

There's weak and strong AGI. Right now I'd argue we have weak AGI with ChatGPT and its plug-ins. The GPT-tech allows for general purpose problem solving, but it often makes mistakes and gets things wrong. We are on the path towards strong AGI, and I have no idea how long it will take to get there.

OpenAI and others are developing benchmarks to test this tech against various problems.

[gremlinsinc]

I wouldn't consider chatGPT by itself or with plugins AGI, however the langchain+long-term memory + automated agents, yeah that's f'n AGI at least as it's aptly called: Baby AGI.

[roflyear]

It might be baby agi but as it stands I would argue it is not.

[gremlinsinc]

you realize, babies aren't as impressive as a PhD. right? I mean they're cute and impressive in how they learn and pick things up, baby AGI is kinda like that. the hype is basically going gaga around a baby.

but it will grow up and before you know it.

[roflyear]

How could I not realize those things? Do you think I'm a moron?

[keyle]

I think personally we should also classify human level AGI and smart AGI. After all, the goal is not to make fake humans but to solve problems like cancer.

[jasfi]

After watching how people are applying GPT3.5 and GPT4, I'd say both goals those types of goals will be attempted, and anything else that could be of use.