The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
mlumiste.com
The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
1–10 of 411 posts
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#2Hah can you imagine a world where OpenAi says to all the people who have dumped billions in : "well we lost guys, sorry about that, were just gonna help Google now".
I'll eat my hat after I sell you a bridge.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#3"""
I resigned from OpenAI. I care deeply about the Robotics team and the work we built together. This wasn’t an easy call. AI has an important role in national security. But surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. This was about principle, not people. I have deep respect for Sam and the team, and I’m proud of what we built together.
"""
- Caitlin Kalinowski, previously head of robotics at OpenAI
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ckalinowski_i-resigned-from-o...
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#4> The impotence of naive idealism in the face of economic incentives
A great point. I saw blinding idealism during the early days of GPT era.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#5> Therefore, if a value-aligned, safety-conscious project comes close to building AGI before we do
> It can be debated whether arena.ai is a suitable metric for AGI, a strong case can probably be made for why it’s not. However, that’s irrelevant, as the spirit of the self-sacrifice clause is to avoid an arms race, and we are clearly in one.
No, the spirit is clearly meant for near AGI and we aren’t near AGI
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#6The writing was on the wall as soon as it went all-in on commercializing the tech.
This will never happen, LLMs are already being used very unsafely, and if this HN headline stays where it is OpenAI will quietly remove their charter from their website.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#7Hah can you imagine a world where OpenAi says to all the people who have dumped billions in : "well we lost guys, sorry about that, were just gonna help Google now". I'll eat my hat after I sell you a bridge.
Gemini might be great at benchmarks, it is terrible at actual agentic coding. So Anthropic seems like a more logical choice.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#8> Therefore, if a value-aligned, safety-conscious project comes close to building AGI before we do > It can be debated whether arena.ai is a suitable metric for AGI, a strong case can probably be made for why it’s not. However, that’s irrelevant, as the spirit of the self-sacrifice clause is to avoid an arms race, and we are clearly in one. No, the spirit is clearly meant for near AGI and we aren’t near AGI
AFAIK we're still working on a unified definition and testing theory for whatever "AGI" is.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#9> The impotence of naive idealism in the face of economic incentives.
I don't think it was so much the naivety of idealism, but more an adoption of idealism and related language to help market what was actually being built: a profit-first organization that's taking its true form little by little.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#10It's clever and funny, but nobody is legitimately near AGI, and their own AML Corp link proves Altman believes as much:
> Achieving AGI, he conceded, will require “a lot of medium-sized breakthroughs. I don’t think we need a big one.”
> At the Snowflake Summit in June 2025, Altman predicted that 2026 would mark a breakthrough when AI systems begin generating “novel insights” rather than simply recombining existing information. This represents a threshold he considers critical on the path to AGI.
Though I'm sure they'll try to change the charter before we get to that point, but yeah.