>Leave a comment on your pet definition for “human-level AGI” which is
>
>testable
>
>falsifiable
>
>robust

I can't even give you a definition like that for "general human intelligence".

Obviously your timeline will also vary depending on your definition, so this needs to be two different discussions.

LLMs are at least relatively "general", as opposed to earlier approaches that were restricted to a specific task. So within the domain of language, we made some insane progress in the past 7 years. Whether that constitutes "intelligence" really depends on what you think that is, which nobody agrees on.

Unless someone can define "human general intelligence" and "artificial general intelligence" for me, the discussion of timeline just detracts from the actual progress and near-term implications of recent developments. That's my 2 cents