> but it's a bit presumptuous to think that we are near to making a strong general AI
But I don't think they're presuming that. They're simply saying that it's possible in principle. How long it takes, and whether indeed we ever manage it all, are separate questions.
> They're simply saying that it's possible in principle.
In principle, everything is possible, but some things are so unlikely, that it is reasonable to label them as impossible.
The computer technology we have developed over the last 75 years is so fundamentally different from how our minds work that to think we will develop anything resembling our own intelligence in any reasonable time-frame is insane.
That doesn't mean we can't develop a machine that is able to reason for itself and solve discrete problems. We can. That's not what AI is. AI is Artificial Intelligence. An artificial intelligence defined by us.
There are some things which I think it's reasonable to consider impossible in principle: e.g., FTL travel, time-travel into the past. (That's not to say it would be necessarily unreasonable to hold the opposite view).
But I don't think they're presuming that. They're simply saying that it's possible in principle. How long it takes, and whether indeed we ever manage it all, are separate questions.