[habitable5]

There's a good article about why AGI is not happening rather it's the religion of Silicon Valley: https://fluxus.io/article/alchemy-2-electric-boogaloo it's good despite written by a promptfondler.

[rng-concern]

I've only skimmed the article so I may have missed something but they seem to be equating AGI with consciousness, or that consciousness is required for AGI. I'm not convinced it's required. I'm also not convinced that matching the biology of neurons is required for AGI, which this article seems to assume as well. That said, a really close match to human-style intelligence might be tricky if we simplify the model too much, as we're doing. Perhaps we'll arrive at a different sort of intelligence, that is just as general.

[tim333]

A good sign AGI is coming is that the arguments against it are so weak:

>[AGI impossible because] a researcher in cognitive science at Middlesex University - explained to me why we currently can't even model a single biological neuron, and it is unknown whether we shall ever be able to. The maths doesn't exist yet.

is about on the same level as aircraft are totally impossible because a bloke down the pub said we can't mathematical model one bird feather.

[meowface]

Have you ever tried using Claude Code or Codex on a codebase?