[HN Gopher] What Is Artificial General Intelligence?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What Is Artificial General Intelligence?
        
       Author : SweetSoftPillow
       Score  : 42 points
       Date   : 2025-09-29 19:31 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | comeonbro wrote:
       | > simp-maxxing
       | 
       | Might want to write this out in full lol I thought this in
       | particular was going to be a much more entertaining point.
        
         | zahlman wrote:
         | To be fair, it is spelled with a single 'x' in the paper.
        
       | mwkaufma wrote:
       | A term in search of a definition, clearly.
        
       | mbgerring wrote:
       | From what I can see, Artificial General Intelligence is a drug-
       | fueled millenarian cult, and attempts to define it that don't
       | consider this angle will fail.
        
         | nativeit wrote:
         | This feels like we're approaching consensus.
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45418763
        
       | nativeit wrote:
       | Artificial general intelligence is a term of art for charlatans
       | who rely on continued blind investments on the order of billions
       | to continue their quixotic (or just cynical) efforts to anoint
       | LLMs with the Holy Water of tech hype[0], blessed by dense
       | forests of jargon and needless anthropomorphisms, and satiated
       | only by ritual human [labor] sacrifices. -- 0: Tech hype holy
       | water is 99.99% Red Bull
        
         | zwnow wrote:
         | Sir we are on hackernews. AI glazers lure in every corner ready
         | to jump at everything critiquing their holy water. Blind to all
         | the theft, blind to all the issues.
        
           | ronsor wrote:
           | That's funny. I see half of everyone on HN being critical of
           | AI, often unfairly so, but we only ever notice the people we
           | disagree with.
           | 
           | I'm guilty of this as well, otherwise I wouldn't be writing
           | this.
        
             | emil-lp wrote:
             | I think most here see AI as a scam and a bubble, but the
             | pro-AI wing has a lot of accounts.
             | 
             | I mean, who has an incentive? Those who want to keep
             | selling.
        
           | eurekin wrote:
           | Im a big AI/ML enthusiast (published one paper!) and was
           | always flabbergasted to see scientists go off the typical
           | provable/ testable lane and venture into philosophical and
           | emotional territories
        
         | emil-lp wrote:
         | Stuart Russell said AGI is coming and that we will get 45
         | trillion dollars from them.
         | 
         | That's what I'm waiting for.
         | 
         | (He didn't specify when or how the money will get here, but I'm
         | betting that I'll get my fair share.)
        
           | YesThatTom2 wrote:
           | I (and I'm being serious) assumed AGI would break into the
           | world's financial institutions and steal the 45 trillion.
        
       | ks2048 wrote:
       | I'm not sure if there's anything interesting here, but I did
       | notice the author was interviewed on the podcast Machine Learning
       | Street Talk about this paper,
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K18Gmp2oXIM&t=3s
        
       | jongjong wrote:
       | It's been a moving goalpost but I think the point where people
       | will be forced to acknowledge it is when fully autonomous agents
       | are outcompeting most humans in most areas.
       | 
       | So long as half of people are employed or in business, these
       | people will insist that it's not AGI yet.
       | 
       | Until AI can fully replace you in your job, it's going to
       | continue to feel like a tool.
        
         | ACCount37 wrote:
         | I wonder if all the grad students that struggle to find jobs
         | now and all the cheap workers in India who were laid off are
         | "feeling the AGI" then.
        
         | slfnflctd wrote:
         | Robotics are also a big one.
         | 
         | Given a useful-enough general purpose body (with multiple
         | appendage options), one of the most significant applications of
         | whatever we end up calling AGI should be _finally_ seeing most
         | of our household chores properly roboticized.
         | 
         | When I can actually give plain language descriptions of
         | 'simple' manual tasks around the house to a machine the same
         | way I would to, say, a human 4th grader, and not have to spend
         | more time helping it get through the task than it would take me
         | to do it myself, that is when I will feel we have turned the
         | corner.
         | 
         | I still am not at all convinced I will see this within the next
         | few decades I probably have left.
        
           | lazide wrote:
           | The military would pay 1000x what a household would for the
           | same capability, and they are nowhere near the ability to do
           | that. Which should tell you all you need to know.
        
       | realityfactchex wrote:
       | It would mean actually reasoning, not just applying stats to look
       | like reasoning.
        
       | EliRivers wrote:
       | _Picture a machine endowed with human intellect. In its most
       | simplistic form, that is Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)_
       | 
       | Artificial human intelligence. Not what I'd call general, but I
       | guess so long as we make it clear that by "general" we don't
       | actually mean general, fine. I'd really expect _actual_ general
       | intelligence to do a lot better than human, in ways we can 't
       | understand any more than ants can comprehend us.
        
       | jonny_eh wrote:
       | Please fix the title in HN to match the actual paper's superior
       | title: "What the F*ck Is Artificial General Intelligence?"
        
       | nis0s wrote:
       | Per my view, it fulfills the following criteria:
       | 
       | 1) Few-shot to zero-shot training for achieving a useful ability
       | on a given new problem.
       | 
       | 2) Self-determining optimal paths to fine-tuning at inference
       | time based on minimal instructions or examples.
       | 
       | 3) Having the capacity to self-correct, maybe by building or
       | confirming heuristics.
       | 
       | All of these concern an intern, for example, who is given a new,
       | unseen task and can figure out the rest without handholding.
        
       | SeanLuke wrote:
       | My answer: while 99% of the AI community was busy working on Weak
       | AI, that is, developing systems that could perform tasks that
       | humans can do notionally because of our Big Brains, a tiny
       | fraction of people promoted Hard AI, that is, AI as a
       | philosophical recreation of Lt. Commander Data.
       | 
       | Hard AI has long had a well-deserved jet black reputation as a
       | flakey field filled with armchair philosophers, hucksters,
       | impressarios, and Loebner followers who don't understand the
       | Turing Test. It eventually got so bad that the entire field
       | decided to rebrand itself as "Artificial General Intelligence".
       | But it's the same duck.
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | The only difference is the same hucksters are trying to sell
         | the notion that LLMs are or will become AGI through some sort
         | of magic trick or with just one more input.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-09-29 23:00 UTC)