Nah I mean I definitely agree with you in part. The difference though is how narrow those smarts were verse these. They were explicitly encoded, or at best statistically assembled. I also agree that the current state of the art is relatively unimpressive compared to what seems like a reasonable expectation of there this tech will go and soon.

I think it’s worth appreciating how much different this is from those previous approaches both in terms of architecture and capabilities. You’d never be able to ask a previous system for example to write a story where every next word starts with the next letter in the alphabet. That’s just a weird, unanticipated request. Yet real, humans like interactions will often be “unanticipated” in that way.

Give it 10 years and I wouldn’t be surprised if we have smaller versions of these models (easier and cheaper to run) that are indistinguishable from people… except for the fact that they are way way smarter than anyone you’ve ever met.

I wonder what humans will do then