[AdieuToLogic]

> They have known for a long time that text completion is what is called 'AI-complete' meaning that if you have full AGI then it can do human level text completion and if you have human level text completion then it can do full AGI.

First, who is "they"?

Second, categorizing "text completion" as being "AI-complete" is nonsensical if the definition[0] of "AI-complete" is agreed upon as being:

  In the field of artificial intelligence, the most
  difficult problems are informally known as AI-complete
  or AI-hard, implying that the difficulty of these
  computational problems, assuming intelligence is
  computational, is equivalent to that of solving the
  central artificial intelligence problem—making computers
  as intelligent as people, or strong AI.[1] To call a
  problem AI-complete reflects an attitude that it would
  not be solved by a simple specific algorithm.

Third, "text completion" has been a feature of messaging applications for years and has thus far not qualified as being an AGI.

Fourth, equating a predictive statistical model to "the computers brains got so big that they are now conscious like you and me" is not based in fact nor science.

LLM's have no provable consciousness. They do have utility in generating relevant tokens based on input tokens known to their training data set however.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI-complete