blueSGL t1_j9mdxby wrote
Reply to comment by maskedpaki in Why are we so stuck on using “AGI” as a useful term when it will be eclipsed by ASI in a relative heartbeat? by veritoast
Again I think we are running up against a semantics issue.
What percentage of human activity would you need to class the thing as 'general'
Because some people argue anything "below 100%" != 'general' and thus 'narrow' by elimination.
Personally I think it's reasonable if you've loaded a system with all the ways ML works currently/all the published papers and task it with spitting out a more optimal system it just might do so. All without being able to do a lot of the things that would be classed as human level intelligence. There are whole swaths of data concerning human matters that it would not need to train on or that the system would in no way need to be middling-expert at.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments