Hard to imagine how that term could matter. It's just short-hand for some "thing" that people care to talk about. I'm not interested in quibbling over definitions or whatever. Nor am I interested in the kind of discussions that get all wrapped in what "general" means and reduce to arguing that even humans don't have "general intelligence", etc. To me, going down those rabbit-holes is really "losing the plot."
AGI is what someone says when they want to sound like they're talking about AI, but don't know anything about AI, and still feel the need to sound as if they're wearing a lab coat.
It's like when you're in a room where a bunch of people who can't name a medical school are trying to explain to each other what r0 means in a discussion that they believe is about COVID.
You do realize that they were trying to have a rational discussion here, right? They're pretty unambiguously asking for information and trying to understand your viewpoint.
If AGI is the wrong term to use then either get over it, or explain what term they should use. Particularly when they ask you to explain why the term is wrong.
The idea of a self aware AI is a little difficult for most people to define. Even if the term AGI isn't accurate, don't you think it's important that people be able to discuss the topic? Especially when those people are quite explicitly trying to learn more about it.
"You do realize that they were trying to have a rational discussion here, right?"
Rational is another HPMoR red flag word.
All rational means is "follows a rationale," or a rules system. Astrology, anti-vaxxing, belief in Hermetic magic, and chemtrails, while all ridiculous and incorrect, are also fully rational. So is Dungeons and Dragons, or internalizing Star Trek lore.
.
"They're pretty unambiguously asking for information and trying to understand your viewpoint."
And I gave it, clearly and politely.
.
"If AGI is the wrong term to use"
No, it's not the wrong term to use. Swap it with a synonym and you have the same problem.
Look. What if I started rambling about fixing aging? Like, straight up immortality. Would you think I was a compelling medical light, or an outsider with dreams that don't make sense given today's realities?
Flying cars? Pocket fusion devices?
"bUt ThEyRe ScIeNtIfIcAlLy PoSsIbLe"
It doesn't matter if I'm "using the wrong term." I could call them aerial vehicles, floating carriages, hover-Datsuns, whatever you want.
The problem is the idea. Anyone who's plying these ideas has completely missed the boat, and doesn't recognize that they're reciting bad science fiction.
.
"The idea of a self aware AI is a little difficult for most people to define"
I see you're still missing the boat.
.
"don't you think it's important that people be able to discuss the topic?"
It is approximately as important as discussing vampire repellant strategies.
What plot? Would you care to elaborate?
Hard to imagine how that term could matter. It's just short-hand for some "thing" that people care to talk about. I'm not interested in quibbling over definitions or whatever. Nor am I interested in the kind of discussions that get all wrapped in what "general" means and reduce to arguing that even humans don't have "general intelligence", etc. To me, going down those rabbit-holes is really "losing the plot."