[euleriancon]

Help me understand this viewpoint that AGI being possible in the near-ish future is a myth, I see it repeated quite a lot.

I've been in NLP since the LSTM days and it's hard for me to look at LLMs and not just think they are incredible. It's truly a different level of expressiveness. So much of capabilities research is pointing to LLMs effectively learning a world model.

RLVR is also proving really effective. It is hard for me to imagine a world in the future where LLMs aren't at human level performance across a wide variety of tasks.

I fully acknowledge that current LLM labs have a financial interest in people believing AGI is very near, but from what I'm reading in the literature and seeing myself experimenting with the SOTA models it doesn't seem totally unreasonable.

What evidence are you seeing that makes you confident that AGI in the soon-ish future is a complete myth?

[gopher_space]

> Help me understand this viewpoint that AGI being possible in the near-ish future is a myth, I see it repeated quite a lot.

Nobody will buy an AI with enough context to develop critiques of their own organizational structure.

[weregiraffe]

If AGI is near, why Tesla still doesn't have real FSD?

[flebron]

I think you might be thinking of "AGI" as some sort of point in time, where something happens and everyone all at once has some technology. Not only is the progress towards AGI gradual, it's also very jagged in both capabilities and especially who has access to it. It's irrelevant whether a particular company, like Cisco, Pepsi, or Tesla, has some capability, when there exists a different research lab that is at the frontier, approaching AGI from some direction.

[rossjudson]

- Liability - What can you really fit in HW4? - No right answers in many situations. - But mostly liability. It's pretty good.

[balherian]

ergo propter hoc?

[weregiraffe]

No. AGI should be able to drive a car.

Unfortunately an LLM is not AGI, and video recording is not text.