Earlier quoted context omitted.
There will be no AGI during our lifetime. It seems weird to me that people that should understand how ML works (e.g. sama) instead of educating laypeople about about how this actually works and the huge limits the technology has, start talking nonsense about AGIs like some random scifi fan at a convention. Depressing.
How can you speak with such confidence, when Hinton and Ilya Sutskever can not? Hinton even said it is possible in next 5-10 years. While, you can believe whatever you believe, please don't bash people as laypeople or something as nonsense.
Will we get very good software in the form of personal assistants that could answer questions in depth about a large number of topics? Most likely. Chat GPT is very good at a lot of things, and its only going to get better. Compute amount is going to be an issue though.
Will we get something that resembles a human sitting behind a keyboard, except an expert in every single subject on the internet with some markov chain process that determines objective subfunctions to minimize? Could be. Thing is though, there still has to be an overarching code to run that markov chain, which is not AGI. Definitely dangerous in the wrong hands, but not dangerous by itself - CTRL C could stop its execution at any time.
Will we get a AGI that is smart enough to circumvent that ctrl c signal, break containment, take over the world, and kill all humans, all in the spirit of turning the earth into a super computer? Nah. To even start to code that AGI, you need to get around the whole principle of computational irreducability which means first proving that P=NP. An AGI will essentially have to run simulations on the world internally to figure out how things could play out, at an information amount threshold that is less than the information in the world its trying to simulate, which (unless P=NP) is impossible.