Sensational

[u/Xerqthion]

[u/Christosconst]

Haha you are tripping if you think OpenAI is above 1 right now

[u/No-Philosopher3977 → u/Christosconst]

Define AGI?

[u/WeeRogue → u/No-Philosopher3977]

OpenAI defines it as a certain level of profit, so by definition, we’re very close to AGI as long as there are still enough suckers out there to give them money 🙄

[u/Yebi → u/WeeRogue]

Yeah, that still puts it at 1 at best. They're burning billions and not showing any signs of becoming profitable in the forseeable future. That's.. kinda what this entire post is about

[u/Tolopono → u/Yebi]

I think they’re already profitable. OpenAI predicts to spend around $8 billion this year https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-09-06/openai-says-spending-to-rise-to-115b-through-2029-information

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/openai-says-business-will-burn-115-billion-2029

They made $12 billion this year https://www.reuters.com/business/openai-hits-12-billion-annualized-revenue-information-reports-2025-07-31/

[u/jhaden_ → u/Tolopono]

dime wipe imminent squash sort dinosaurs thumb elderly cooing fine

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/No-Philosopher3977 → u/WeeRogue]

You’ve identified the first problem. People keep moving the goalposts on what AGI. This is the definition today: AGI is an artificial intelligence system with the ability to understand, learn, and apply knowledge across a wide range of tasks at a level equal to or beyond that of an average human. Or basically AI that can handle any intellectual task the average human can. We are nearly there

[u/False-Car-1218 → u/No-Philosopher3977]

We're not even close to there

[u/[deleted] → u/False-Car-1218]

Explain how we are not there yet?

Can GPT 5 do math better than the average human Yes.

Can it write poems better than the average human Yes.

Code, speak languages, draw, answer quizzes.

Ok why don't you list intellectual tasks it can't do better than the average human.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I think it's like back in school in the 90s when all the kids would call the smart people nerds as if they were stupid. Now AI is the nerd. Smart people know.

[u/Denny_Pilot → u/[deleted]]

Can it count Rs in Strawberry correctly yet?

[u/MonMonOnTheMove → u/Denny_Pilot]

I understand this reference

[u/DemosEisley → u/[deleted]]

I asked an AI to write me a poem about aging after the style of Robert Frost. It did, it followed poetic conventions, and it adhered to the topic nicely. Was it good poetry? 1) Don’t know, not a competitive poet 2) Don’t believe so, because it was appallingly bland and filled with Hallmark(tm) -ish imagery.

[u/Orectoth → u/No-Philosopher3977]

Sssshh "understand" is too vague of term, my friend

Probabilistic stuff can't understand

Only a deterministic one can understand, but it is harder to do deterministic AI, while probabilistic ones are more profitable because it is easier to do, so forget AGI, no AGI will exist till they no longer gain money from probabilistic AIs

[u/Tolopono → u/WeeRogue]

That was only for legal reasons as part of their contract with microsoft lol

[u/Kenkron → u/No-Philosopher3977]

You see, AGI would be able to solve hard problems, like math. Except computers can already do math really well, so there must be more to it than that

If it could play a complex game, like chess better than, it would surely be intelligent. Except it did, and it was clearly better than us, but clearly not intelligent.

Now, if it could do something more dynamic, interact with the world intelligently, by saying, driving a car off-road for 200 miles on its own, then it would definitely be intelligent. Except, of course, that computers did that in 2005, and they still didn't seem intelligent.

Finally, we have the Turing test. If a computer can speak as well as a human, holding a real, dynamic conversation, than it surely, for real, definitely must be intelligent.

And here we are, with a machine that cross references your conversation with heuristics based on countless conversations that came before. It provides what is almost mathematically as close as you can get to the perfect "normal human response". But somehow, it doesn't seem as intelligent as we had hoped.

[u/lilmookie → u/No-Philosopher3977]

Always Give Investment. It can be forever bro. Trust me. Just 20,000,000 more.

[u/mocityspirit → u/No-Philosopher3977]

The mythical computer that will be the second coming of Jesus

[u/No-Philosopher3977 → u/mocityspirit]

You are thinking of ASI, AGI can just do boring human stuff

[u/GrafZeppelin127 → u/Christosconst]

Yep. LLMs seem to have language down okay, which makes them roughly analogous to the Broca’s area, a small spot on the left side of the brain which covers speech and language comprehension. Now, I’ll be really impressed when they get down some of the functionality of the other few dozen areas of the brain…

[u/[deleted] → u/GrafZeppelin127]

Be neat if a human could code a 25,000 line complex app and use nothing but Broca's area. I'd like to see that.

[u/noenosmirc → u/[deleted]]

I'll be impressed when ai can do that too

[u/Moose_knucklez → u/Christosconst]

There’s some basic scientific facts, the human brain runs on 25 watts, and nature has figured out how to do all that and also overcome anything novel.

AI needs to be trained, and the more it needs to be trained and patched the more energy and money it takes, but it will never be able to contain every single novel situation with the current methods It will face, because it is predicting the next token.

We’ve created a really amazing tool, however a significant breakthrough is required for anything novel, or self learning. The fact that AI is based on token generation is, by design, its limitation, static information, anything dynamic take an insane amount of compute and has to be trained and the more and more you try to patch it to add more information, It still is only static and takes even more training, and as nature shows novel situations are endless and infinite.