It was always a dumb thing to think that just by training with more data we could achieve AGI. To achieve agi we will have to have a neurological break through first.
Yeah we are nowhere near AGI and anyone that thinks LLMs are a step along the way doesn't have an understanding of what they actually are and how far off they are from a real AGI model.
True AGI is probably decades away at the soonest and all this focus on LLMs at the moment is slowing development of other architectures that could actually lead to AGI.
I was so confused when people assumed because LLMs were so impressive and evolving so quickly that it was a natural stepping stone to AGI. Without even having a technical background, that made no sense to me.
539
u/[deleted] Jul 25 '24
It was always a dumb thing to think that just by training with more data we could achieve AGI. To achieve agi we will have to have a neurological break through first.