Comment by mediaman
10 days ago
The context is whether this capability is required to qualify as AGI. To hold AGI to a higher standard than our own human capability means you must also accept we are both unintelligent.
10 days ago
The context is whether this capability is required to qualify as AGI. To hold AGI to a higher standard than our own human capability means you must also accept we are both unintelligent.
No, it just means you have a stronger prior that a human being is generally intelligent. We don't ask that question of each other because it's obvious.
It doesn't make sense to hold you to the same standard I hold a model to. We scrutinize test scores for hints of ourselves and dress up the process with rigor, formalisms, operationalizations. A machine's beating you on a test, or your favorite set of such, is not very convincing evidence it is generally capable in anything like the way you are, much less sentient. Similarly it would be silly to conclude from your failure on the same battery of tests that you are not generally intelligent. Maybe you were tired or drunk.