I don't think we should take it as a given that these are truly precursors for A... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		airstrike 4 months ago \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Jagged AGI: o3, Gemini 2.5, and everything after I don't think we should take it as a given that these are truly precursors for AGI. We may be going about it the wrong way entirely and need to backtrack and find a wholly new architecture, in which case current capabilities would predate AGI but not be precursors.

tomrod 4 months ago [–]

I call them precursors because we would anticipate an ASI to be able to do thsse things. Perhaps necessary conditions would be a more appropriate term here.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact