Did you make sure you agreed on what was meant by "AGI"?

I ask because ever since InstructGPT I've been noticing that people not only don't agree on any letter of that initialism, but also sometimes mean by it something not present in any letter.

So for me, even InstructGPT counts as a general purpose AI; for OpenAI, it's not what they mean by AGI (they require it to be economically significant); and it definitely isn't superhuman (which some people need, I'd call that ASI not merely AGI); and we still can't agree on what consciousness is let alone what it would take for an AI to have it, but some people include that in their definition of AGI and I never have.

No one can predict what innovations will come. So a more accurate answer would be "I don't know, but not likely soon". But it should be pretty clear by now that the current driver of AGI talk (LLMs, possibly by extension, NNs) is not going to get us there. It might be a component of some future AGI, but not the basis

"got a prediction of AGI in 1 to 2 centuries"

Predictions at this time scale are bullshit, at least in modern technological civilization. It would have been different in the Stone Age, but we don't live in the Stone Age, when things barely changed for millennia.

For some perspective:

100 years ago, radio was barely a thing, airplanes were made of wood and canvas, Africa was thinly populated, antibiotics didn't exist, semiconductors weren't useful yet and the British Empire reached its largest extent ever.

200 years ago, railway wasn't a thing, electric telegraphy wasn't a thing, germ theory wasn't a thing, photography wasn't a thing, most parts of Europe were still feudal, Oregon and California were still Amerindian country, the US was an unimportant country on the fringe of the developed world, and official science of the day denied the very existence of meteors as space rocks, because only dumb hicks would believe in rocks falling from the sky, ya know?

Don't tell me that people back then could make accurate predictions about the technological level of 2024. Neither can your smartest person, even though I don't doubt their smarts. Making long-term predictions is about as reliable as making long-term weather forecasts. (Not climate. Weather.)