Eric Jang is top ML talent, these numbers are accurate. I work in ML and have followed his work for years
In marketing, they say 5 years when it's actually 20 years away.
We know how to do fusion. We know the physics behind it. We haven't yet figured out how to build profitable fusion plants, and we probably won't for a long time, if for no other reason than improvements in fission--modern fission plants are the best .
When it comes to AGI, we have no clue. It's a constantly moving target, because our conceptions of intelligence evolve. Most things that were once "AI" became "non-AI" solved problems after we got good at them using a couple key insights, e.g. that image processing could be sped up with CNNs due to the existence of a topology on the inputs. We still have no idea what makes us tick, and moreover there is not a strong economic incentive to replicate all of our intelligence... although, of course, automation will continue and that itself will be disruptive enough.
Has nature ever proven that nuclear fusion can be sustained at human scale?
I would bet that agi comes first.
We're fairly certain it can be done given unbounded resources, we have some idea of the principles involved, but then there's a rather significant element of "draw the rest of the fucking owl" between where we are and where we imagine we could go.
I'm not aware of anything he's accomplished but can see the delusion. ML people seem to think the output of their work is not mediocre. Yeah, you bred monkeys till something resembling shakespeare appeared to some reproducible consistency and it is better than something someone can code - but that's an incredibly low bar.
Acknowledge that were still very much in the stone age of AI and what were doing is large scale analytics at best.
He's exposed to enough corporate work. https://www.linkedin.com/in/evjang/
If he doesn't like this place, he can just make another post like this and I am sure ML startup CEO and ML division heads will be flooding his inbox.