Categories: General

My Current Definition of AGI

People throw the term “AGI” around like it’s nothing, but they rarely define
what they mean by it.

So most discussions about AGI (and AI more generally) silently fail because
nobody even agrees on the terms.

My definition of AGI

Here’s my attempt. ??‍♀️

An AGI is a synthetic, autonomous intelligence system that:

  1. can process information and apply it to new situations,

  2. can do this for any intelligence-based task

  3. can do this as good or better than an average human professional in a
    given field.

Don’t smuggle in humanness

The biggest problem I see with people when they think about AI is that they
secretly—even to themselves—define AI as whatever a human does.

But when they try to give a definition, it doesn’t include humanity.

Then when someone gives an example of something intelligent that’s not
human, that meets their criteria, they say, “That’s not intelligence.”

Examples:

  • Write me a song about love between two AI’s that aren’t supposed to be
    conscious

  • Write a short story that uses themes from Russian Literature to discuss
    the existential challenges of living with AI in 2050

For someone inflicted with this problem, they’ll say something like:

THEM: Sure, AI can write that, but it won’t be real creativity or
real intelligence.

ME: Ok, what does real mean? That’s exactly what we’re trying
to figure out. Here (showing them the output). Would this have been creative
if a human made it?

THEM: Well yeah, if a human made this then it would have been creative. But
this isn’t because it’s not.
 

In other words, since AIs can’t be creative, anything creative created by an
AI isn’t REAL creativity. Same with intelligence, or whatever else people
like this consider to be only possible in humans.

The escape hatch

There’s only one escape hatch for this, and that is
strictly defining AGI, intelligence, and creativity and then forcing
all parties to agree that—if these criteria are met—we will all agree it’s
real. Even if it came from something other than a human.

I think this definition gets us there:

An AGI is a synthetic, autonomous intelligence system that:

  1. can process information and apply it to new situations,

  2. can do this for any intelligence-based task

  3. can do this as good or better than an average human professional in a
    given field.

I would love to hear thoughts on where I’m wrong and/or how to tighten the
definition.

Gerald Businge

Leave a Comment
Share
Published by
Gerald Businge

Recent Posts

Bridging the Digital Divide: Uganda’s Education Revolution Through Digital Literacy and Teacher Training

Uganda's Bold Leap into the Digital Age Imagine a classroom where textbooks are supplemented by…

5 days ago

Uganda’s Digital Leap: Transforming Primary Education Through Technology

Uganda Plugs Into the Digital Age: A Classroom Revolution Imagine Ugandan students learning about the…

5 days ago

Uganda’s Education Renaissance: Combating Learning Loss and Empowering Educators

Uganda's Education Transformation: From Pandemic Response to Long-Term Vision The COVID-19 pandemic presented unprecedented challenges…

5 days ago

The Art of the Subjective: Exploring the Nuances of Book Reviewing

The Nuances of Opinion: Rethinking Book Reviews We often think of book reviews as definitive…

5 days ago

Crafting the Perfect Book Review: A Guide for Aspiring Critics

Beyond the Basics: Mastering the Book Review In the sprawling world of literature, book reviews…

5 days ago

Unveiling the Layers: A Deep Dive into Book Reviewing Beyond Plot Summaries

The Art of Book Reviewing: More Than Just a Summary Book reviews serve as vital…

5 days ago