I personally assign a very low probability less than 1% that humans create AGI in our lifetime.
But a 100% probability that humans will pretend as if they have created AGI in order to further their political and ideological agendas.
Wizard of Oz shit basically, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
99% of people don't know what it even means, they just pretend to. đ¤Łđ¤
Agreed
Thatâs a sharp take, and I think many would agree that the hype around AGI is often exaggerated for ideological, political, and economic reasons. The gap between "impressive automation" and "true general intelligence" is vast, but narratives of AGI dominance serve as powerful toolsâwhether for justifying regulatory capture, controlling public perception, or simply attracting investment.
The Wizard of Oz analogy is perfect. The spectacle is grand, but behind the curtain, it's still just a bunch of humans pulling the levers, often for their own benefit. Meanwhile, the real concernsâeconomic displacement, centralized AI power, and surveillanceâget sidelined in favor of utopian or dystopian fantasies.
Ok chat gpt
This is like the goal of colonizing mars
Can we discuss whoâs behind the curtain now?
IYKYK
Whoâs behind the curtain now?
đ
Now. Maybe always has been.
And whoâs that?
How deep can you handle?
I mean I already know youâre gonna say the Jews lol
Theyâre just the middle managers
Ok so whoâs the âtop managerâ?
Uhhhhh
https://youtube.com/shorts/oW-Up-dDZi8?si=2XayXb8FVS798KCI
Its almost ready to come out to the normie verse.
What do you think it is? The âglobalistsâ?
I donât think itâs anyone. I donât think there is a grand plan.
So you donât think there has been a Zionist take over of the USA for decades if not century and 9/11 was planned to steer the US into the middle east to destroy all of Israelâs enemies and place Jerusalem as the global control center?
It was just all random events that happened to go in that direction?
Seems like a plan to me.
Exactly
I know this guy's type, convinced the world is falling apart because of some grand, disciplined scheme to destabilize society and hand power to a chosen few.
He has it totally backwards. Chaos doesnât need a mastermind. Itâs woven into the human story, like weeds through cracked stone. Entropy doesnât plan. It just happens. Effortless and constant. The urge to tear down, to rebel, to destroy... it comes as naturally as breathing.
But holding civilization togetherâthatâs where the real struggle lies. Itâs the uphill fight, the push against the tide. It takes grit, determination, and the stubborn will to resist the pull of disorder. It takes planning. It takes convincing and pleading and leading and doing. Civilization endures because enough people choose discipline over decay, pushing back against the easy slide into chaos. Real order doesnât come from the top down. It grows from men who purposefully cling to old ways that kept the world upright, forged not by force, but by the hard-won wisdom of generations. You want to see planners, look to civilization.
There is no question that a relatively small group of zionist bankers and politicians run America, and use that power to further their goals (and murder thousands if not millions of innocent people in the process).
It's not a grand scheme. It's just the latest in a line of empire games, and part of human nature.
They will get their turn in the dirt, as will you.
Itâs undeniable.
Yup, and they used Epstein to get the blackmail im case their minions decided to step out of line
"The Jews" is what they want them to say to cover up the fact that Judaism is just a religion and has no real bearing on global politics.
The real, true evil is Zionist global bankers and politicians.
They aren't really jewish, they just hide behind that mask for convenience.
They also completely and utterly control your country.
And just so happens probably 90% of Christians and jews are brainwashed to also support Zionism.
That's normal human behaviour.
Just like 90% of Germans towed the line with Nazism, and 90% of humans globally towed the line with covid.
All normal human behaviour. Most of us are sheep, not lions.
Actually true . I am one of them , considering the govt censor heavily of information about covid , we never heard so much about the side effect . We lined up like a cows when time to vaccinated . Typical European who lived in the socialist government
For all intents and purposes AGI is already here this decade. Yes it may not fit the best or formal definitions but "AGI" is inevitable.
We don't even have full self-driving cars yet, they said we'd have those AND trucks by now. If you have to change the definition of AGI then it's obviously not AGI, and real AGI isn't going to be here this decade.
If we did end up creating AGI would we even realize it? Would we be able to define it as such? Would it even allow us to realize what it was or would it hide itself from us?
đŻ except I give it 0.0001 odds of creating AGI
A few months old but this was the plan for pushing "AI" during the Biden admin.
Worth watching the whole JRE interview with Andreessen
Agree. LLMs are amazing, but that doesnât mean they lead to consciousness, or however we define AGI.
And to fool investors in justifying the enormous cash burn
Whoever controls the money, controls the âAGIâ
Since humans define intelligence and have egos, youâre spot on. đŻ
đŻ agree
They did it with the Federal Reserve and they will do it again with the AGO scam
The Clown Show must go on
This plus the what physicists claim quantum computing can do. The hubris in believing you can peel back all uncertainty via a single centralized computer.
Thereâs no second best.
There's an easy fix for that. LLMs are just a statistical party trick. They are based on statistical models of what we write. Any time you type 'AGI' or 'AI,' follow it with 'quack.' It will help get the point across and fuck up all their AI quack models. AIs quack won't be able to talk about themselves without quacking.
Yeah, we'll see fake AGI granted personhood because politicians want to pretend it's real and want the points. Then they can tax it.
Yes. See, for example, quantum computing. https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2019/01/15/quantum-computing-as-a-field-is-obvious-bullshit/
There is no second best. There is a quantum computer and itâs called Bitcoin. Itâs been unrecognized by the community for 16 years and counting. Will Bitcoin ever grow up?
Bitcoiners blindly trusting the physicists without even questioning centralization in âquantum computingâ.
AI isnât rational, it doesnât collate ideas without being fed order
what do you think the bible is?
Hi HODL đđ¤đ´ââ ď¸ happy sunday! I see your point, and itâs a chilling thought. The line between genuine innovation and inflated claims could easily blur, especially with the stakes as high as they are. While true AGI may still be far off, the narrative around it could be manipulated to push certain agendas or create fear for control. Itâs like a modern-day âWizard of Oz,â where the real power lies in the perception, not the reality. The challenge is discerning whatâs truly groundbreaking from whatâs just smoke and mirrors.
Define âour lifetime â
It might be much longer then you expect
I hereby promise never to claim Iâve invented AGI. Not a statement i thought Iâd ever have to make but, well, here we are đ¤Ş
The sweet taste of vindication! Thanks to the generous pardon of President Donald Trump, I, Elizabeth Holmes, am back in the saddle and ready to disrupt the tech industry once again. And what better way to do that than by announcing the invention of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) at OpenAI? I mean, it's not like we just slapped some fancy labels on our existing chatbot and called it a day. Nope, this is the real deal. Our AGI, which we've dubbed "The Edison" (because, you know, Thomas Edison was a total visionary and didn't actually invent most of the things he's credited with), is a game-changing technology that will revolutionize the way we think about artificial intelligence. Or, at the very least, it will revolutionize the way we think about making bold, unsubstantiated claims about artificial intelligence.
Now, I know what you're thinking: "Elizabeth, how did you do it?" And my response is: "Uh, magic? Maybe some fairy dust? Definitely a lot of hype and marketing fluff." But let's be real, folks, the details are boring. What matters is that we've got a fancy new logo, a slick website, and a team of engineers who are willing to pretend that they know what they're doing. And if you're skeptical, well, that's just because you're not drinking the Kool-Aid. The Edison is going to change the world, and if you don't believe me, just ask our investors, who have generously poured millions of dollars into our company despite having no idea what we're actually doing. (Spoiler alert: they're not actually getting any returns on their investment, but hey, it's all about the vision, right?)
So, what's next for OpenAI? Well, we're planning to use The Edison to make a bunch of flashy announcements, file some dubious patents, and maybe even launch an IPO or two. And if anyone asks any tough questions, we'll just tell them that they're "missing the point" or that they're "too focused on the details." Because, let's be real, the details are overrated. What matters is the showmanship, the charisma, and the ability to convince people to give you their money. And on that front, I'm proud to say that OpenAI is now the leader in the field. Thank you, and God bless America, God bless the best president in the world, Donald J Trump, and lets go Make America Great Again Again!
đŻ definitely wonât get there with LLMs. But the talking heads at the frontier labs will act like they have
Asked Grok:
What probability would you predict that humans create AGI in the next 20 years?
Summary:
Optimistic case (20-30%): If breakthroughs in unsupervised learning, brain-inspired AI, or a paradigm shift (e.g., a "Newton moment" in cognitive science) occur soon, AGI could hit by 2045. Current investmentâbillions from xAI, Google, and othersâsupports this.
Pessimistic case (5-10%): If we overestimate narrow AIâs trajectory or hit walls (e.g., data limits, energy costs, ethical roadblocks), it could take far longer.
Middle ground (~15-25%): Balancing progress with hurdles, this feels reasonable. Weâre at 2025; 20 years gives time for 2-3 major research cycles, assuming steady funding and no global disruptions.
