Hacker News Reader

>how much further are we moving the goal post?

My goalpost for AGI is when Microsoft can fire their entire engineering staff, replace them with AI, and not notice any decrease in productivity or quality of output.

This test is empirically verifiable (in principle). No need to argue over whether the AI scoring X% on Y assessment task is “truly” impressive or not.

View on HN

You mean that isn’t the Teams origin story?

Teams is the projection of a fourth dimension ancient Eldritch horror onto the mortal plane. AI had nothing to do with it.

You’re confusing the goal - the goal here isn’t about the finish line but the point where people all concede that the finish line is actually reachable without any major, presently unthinkable advances.

Surely anyone familiar with software engineering knows that the finish line is reached when the finish line is reached. And no sooner.

Physicists at the beginning of the 20th century also thought that the finish line of physics was in sight and all that remained was tightening a few constants. Look how that turned out.

This perspective is too reductionist - we make predictions of success all the time based on first principles reasoning. It’s perfectly sane to try to predict, and make good arguments, if AGI is possible to achieve without new breakthroughs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com