> OpenAI defines [AGI] as "highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work."
Well in that case: Excel reached AGI decades ago. It outperforms humans at the single most economically valuable task in the world: adding up numbers in a spreadsheet. Congratulations, Microsoft :)
And I would argue LLMs aren't either. A lot of economically valuable tasks involve manual labor. Can LLMs fix your plumbing?
It would help if OpenAI would define what 'most' means and give some examples.
Remember they said their LLMs are like a phd level brains? It's just hype and bullsh!ttery. Don't get me wrong, genAI is great and really useful, but it's not AGI imo. And there is no consensus what AGI means, so the industry should come up with an agreed definition first.
[0] To me autonomous means self directed, e.g. we humans look at things and then decide which problem or thing to work on. LLMs don't do that. We have to tell them. Yes they might work on a sub task autonomously, but still require human input later on (review), because we can't fully trust its output is correct.
I think Demis Hassabis has a better take on AGI and he believes it's still years away.
----
"Demis Hassabis says current AI falls short of AGI. Solving hard problems or producing impressive outputs does not prove a system has broad, reliable human-like intelligence. AGI would need creativity, planning, long-term memory, and consistent cross-domain reasoning—qualities current models lack."
Well in that case: Excel reached AGI decades ago. It outperforms humans at the single most economically valuable task in the world: adding up numbers in a spreadsheet. Congratulations, Microsoft :)