| > Now, if we go by this definition, which is pretty specific and clear... I was going to say, no, you've defined "general" pretty well, but "intelligence" you didn't define at all. But on second thought, I guess you did - learning. I might amend that slightly. It might be learning to do. I don't care if it can learn the words about, say, chemistry. Can it learn to solve chemistry problems? The remaining area of fuzziness is hidden in "at human level". At what human level? I took a year of college chemistry. Can it do chemistry at that level? How about at the level of someone with a BS in chemistry? A PhD? Those are all "human" levels, but they are very different. If it can do, say, all college subjects at undergrad level... I guess that's the benchmark for "a well rounded human". > I think we've already achieved this. I want to think about it some more before I definitely agree, but you've made the best case that I have seen. The flaw I think I see is that, from a well-rounded education, we expect a human to be able to specialize, to become an expert in something. I'm not sure LLMs are quite there yet. They're closer than I was thinking 10 minutes ago, though. |