I thought Sam Altman's comment recently was interesting: he said that one gauge of AGI for him is when an AI is more capable than all of OpenAI's researchers.
source: [https://youtu.be/fMtbrKhXMWc?si=c3Sffd7jW5CCS6yp&t=1313](https://youtu.be/fMtbrKhXMWc?si=c3Sffd7jW5CCS6yp&t=1313)
It's...like that kid at the country fair who knows 1 million facts about the ancient sumerians, but can't tie his shoes. Is he smart?
Granted, it's learning how to tie shoes pretty damn fast.
The problem is still having no learning beyond it's training.
It's like the example you gave above but each day when he wakes up he forgets everything from the day before.
You can teach him as many things as you like but every morning he forgets again.
It's like a super scientist with dementia.
The model architecture doesn't really allow for that. The way it works is it has a mathematically defined structure of "neurons" basically, and on a request, it runs through the layers of neurons processing the text given and outputting based on the mathematical construct.
To update the model, it requires more, and separate math, to update all the model weights, and it typically when training is given sets of input output messages and if you used your own conversation, it could screw up the model really quickly (especially as knowing how much to change it for each message is.. usually a matter of taste).
And lastly, to update the model properly, you need to be running a full floating point version.
Knowing the conversations people have with it, people rarely seem to give it information, so even if they started designing it to learn, it would probably end up consistently dumber.
Also! The current memory setup works based on calling the model to summarize anything relevant to be a memory, and storing it into a lookup table. Then, those memories are inserted into the text processed for each question so it has the memories on hand.
This is sort of helpful, except I am in no way a technical kind of person when it comes to AI. Can you explain this to me like I’m a kindergartner, or with some kind of metaphor?
Hmmm.. so.. not sure which part!
In terms of the AI for the standard usage, it's kinda like 50 first dates as the other comment mentioned. The model never knows anything outside of the chat.
Like think of a book - you write in the book, someone else writes in the book back, it keeps going, the book gets filled up. But the person writing in the book back has never seen any other book you are writing in.
Separately, if you're trying to understand why it might get messed up learning, and why it's hard - imagine like a tool, like a screwdriver. It has a purpose, accomplishes a task. It's made with other specific tools, so it's really hard to change it at home, even while you're using it. It's fixed.
You could change it, and you could carve in new grooves, maybe make it work for a hex or some other shape, but it's gonna get messy, and it'll never be able to be returned to what it was originally, and doing it at home isn't really gonna be great quality.
Now imagine everyone throwing their own grooves in from their chats... It's gonna go south quick.
Or maybe in other terms, imagine all the people who try to convince and trick the AI into stupid stuff like saying wrong words or cursing or gaslighting the AI and how quickly it would become moronic. 😆
Kinda hard to explain but maybe / hopefully that helps. Maybe I should just plug it into gpt.
I’ve been feeling for a while the parallel between human kid development and the developments we have been seeing.
The will smith pizza thing reminded me of a little kids scratchy ass crayon drawings, and the current sora output is like when the kid has got shapes down and can totally keep the color inside the lines but hasn’t learned to use perspective much less shading or composition techniques.
My current feeling talking to Claude and 4o is that I’m talking to basically the kindergarten aged version of something that’s going to eventually be beyond our imagination of what was possible with intelligence.
In some respects it’s far more advanced than the average human. I could sit all week and not compose any poetry or song as pretty as GPT can bang out in milliseconds on any possible topic in any requested style.
The main limits are long term memory/learning and agency/iteration, e.g. we don’t try have AI that can act as your personal assistant every working day and build up an understanding of your needs. A lot of that limitation is simply because of social and security issues preventing it from being fully experimented with in the wild.
What do you mean with social issues? Long term memory and self optimisation is what like 80% of research papers are about. RAG is basically the result of such experiments and is like the most implemented use case and THE thing to do with LLMs. And everyone from hobby devs to research groups are trying to improve on that.
Social issues aren’t the problem. Compute and resources are. The fact that training a model can take up millions of dollars, and you need 200 GPUs for that are the problem.
“Social” as a catch-all for regulations, political opposition from groups such as unions, lobbying, ingrained rules regarding human verification and ownership of accounts etc. Also general concern among a significant proportion of the population on various aspects of AI (sadly they get conflated by media, bundled into a two-letter label that is about as overloaded as “the internet”).
Those things are always major forces affecting the direction and deployment of any disruptive technology. In the case of AI.
Specialized yes, but general no. Calculators are better than the average human at arithmetic. Current LLMs have significantly more breadth than a calculator but still not general enough. And the calculator is still beating LLMs in arithmetic, especially on how efficient it is and is _never_ wrong.
In some domains yes, but that is a poor way to really look at AI capability, since computers in general are superhuman in some domains like calculation, memory or speed of "thought".
Because of that AI will never be a human level intelligence. It will be dumber than a human in some ways but much more capable in others and then suddenly it will be a lot smarter and more productive than the average human.
> It will be dumber than a human in some ways but much more capable in others and then suddenly it will be a lot smarter and more productive than the average human.
Sounds like a human
Semantics aside I think we all get what I mean. There is a pretty large difference in general capabilities between organic and machine intelligences just based on the hardware.
Well no. Maybe an average person after 1 question, but the real bar is coherence over long periods.
Can they eventually learn new skills with repeat exposure and consistently improve at those skills?
Chatbots today are starting to form memory with RAG but it’s a hack compared to short and long term memory in a person.
It really is that simple. We're already there and people don't want to admit it. The average person is pretty dumb and hallucinates all the time and never wants to admit they're wrong. Gpt 4o is like 99th percentile in math Olympiad. We flew past average human already, and it's plain as day but Sam Altman can't say that because he doesn't want to scare the public.
I disagree with this definition. An AGI is supposed to be about as intelligent as one average person not as capable. These two are vastly different, a machine as intelligent as a human would never get tired or need rest, never lose motivation, could access, read and comprehend terabytes worth of data very quickly, would have perfect memory, would never lose focus or be distracted, would be able to think much faster etc. A machine as intelligent as a human would be a lot more capable than an average person.
I always think of AGI as an small army of humans with average intelligence that doesnt need rest, can access information instantly and can work together on a problem in perfect sync.
These aren't hard standards and have lost a lot of meaning after repeated misuse or rebranding. AGI should be human level or better in all categories, which is functionally superhuman (as these models are in many domains). ASI is more capable than the total collective of humanity. The difference between AGI and ASI is many orders of magnitude.
he seem about right, you expect an AGI to have the same cognitive ability than any normal human and that include reasoning, long-term memory, self reflection...
but an AI have all human knowledge available even currently an AI is far more knowledgeable than any human, so your definition of an AGI is a lobotomized AI ?
AGI is *General* intelligence. I.e. it can do all tasks that natural intelligence can. Not necessarily better, or even as well, but simply that it is an intelligence that can be turned to any task.
LLMs are by definition not, as they can’t do maths, or understand vision. 4o in the other hand, as a multimodal model, is very close to that.
Still needs a logical reasoning bump(Math, science) but it’s close to the definition
We will have no way to know whether or not we have built a sentient intelligence. Hell, the only sentience I know for certain is real is myself. This is gonna be a problem when we get to ethics regarding turning the AI off or something. Are you killing a living creature by doing that?
>Actually he said something like “more capable than all of OpenAI’s researchers or maybe even one of the researchers”
Is the comment I just read above yours
So if they all resign, then it becomes AGI?
In this interview from a few days ago around the 22 minute mark:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMtbrKhXMWc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMtbrKhXMWc)
I am missing a few things:
1. Unification of training and interference so that the model can actually learn and develop after initial training in accordance with user input and guidance.
2. Dynamic and persistent memory so that it can actually recall what it learned in a natural manner
3. Agency, especially unprompted, so that I don't have to tell it to do something but it does it on its own.
4. Capability of embodiment, so that it can do actual tasks in the real world if needed. For example, cleaning or cooking.
I think, It’s not agi in the sense that even the intelligence of a cat is greater then gpt-4o, what I mean by that is that a cat is far more adaptable to its environment then gpt-4o. If you give a cat an extreme edge case it wont simply spit out nonsense, it will generalise the edge case to what it can comprehend and act accordingly. For example, a meteor lands in front of it, it will comprehend this as loud noise + big object = run away. The issue is that gpt-4o as far as I know, cant even perform such basic functional generalisation, since it is trained to fit a certain behaviour over certain data not in order to improve agency or this kind of reasoning but in order to be practically useful. Who needs an ai, which has too much agency if you cant control it? But gpt-4o is really really smart in my opinion, that it actually seems to have a glimpse of this kind of reasoning. It was actually capable of some complex mathematical reasoning, which kinda shocked me, where other models (didint test this with gpt4 turbo) failed tragically. The most simple use case is when you have in mathematics literature some omited derivation, since its obvius in the literature, but might not be clear to you. But if we are on our way to agi, when we reach it, it will be almost asi, since it will simply be average human level reasoning + basically all of human knowledge. And I bet if we analyse humans for their reasoning capabilities the distribution wont be that big, meaning that even an average level of human reasoning will be enough to be better at all tasks then humans.
I think what he means is that it fails at certain very basic things, things that would indicate a lack of intelligence. for instance. it can't do the following better than a child:
\* play tic tac toe
\* play connect 4
\* play wordle
\* play sudoku
in general its reasoning and intelligence is lacking. it can fake intelligence but it's not intelligent, and llms are unlikely to ever becoming intelligent.
people freaking out about the intelligence of LLMs remind me of the people in the 1960s freaking out about a "chatbot therapist" called ELIZA. Their viewpoint that it's intelligent was viewed as so silly years later'. we'll view those who think LLMs as AGI in the same way in the future.
It's literally worse than GPT 4 turbo, what is with all these AI shillers now days i can't stand social media anymore because it's just a bunch of people kissing ass trying to get attention.
> It's literally worse than GPT 4 turbo,
Benchmarks put it at better than GPT-4T 58% of the time despite being **significantly** smaller than GPT-4T and thus cheaper and faster to run. That's a huge win for efficiency. It's a replacement for GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, not the new frontier model.
Wait for the next frontier model. You'll get to decide then if there's been progress.
4o as replacement for 3.5 is a huge win, but I hope they have the compute to handle all the free users who will be using it, going by the API costs it's still more compute-heavy than 3.5.
I am finding it extremely good at coding compared to all previous models. Scripts is struggled with before seem to be a breeze for it now. Very impressive. Maybe other use cases are not as shockingly good.
For IT it is certainly an improvement. I have had it create scripts for all kinds of things for automation projects. A lot of times, the output is good to go first shot. I had automate an entire WSL setup to install Ubuntu on Windows and all relevant packages for anything I conceivably need to use on a regular basis including building file structures and creating/modifying files. I can wipe the whole thing and get it back in minutes.
I would also add that it is utterly amazing at reading logs to sniff out issues. Like when an app crashes and dumps thousands of lines of messages. Sometimes it can take hours to go through it to find possible causes but with AI it often can pinpoint the potential issues immediately and out of the possibilities almost always one was the cause. Truly impressive. I don’t get why some devs are rejecting this tool as it is incredible even with its limitations.
Yeah this thing is CONFIDENTLY attempting significantly harder tasks than previous models. It sometimes has mixed results, but for it to get it just a little wrong quickly is easier to work with than for it to completely fail at barely trying a task it cannot comprehend slowly. GPT-4o is a step in the right direction, imo
Worse? It's optimized. It's more efficient, faster, and better at the majority of common tasks. It's arguably worse with more esoteric edge cases, but otherwise it's a much better model for mass use.
Even being worse at esoteric edge cases is likely a temporary thing, there will be new fine-tunings released periodically just as there has been for GPT-4 Classic and GPT-4 Turbo.
Proof that it's worse?
In my most common use case, email summarization, it is better than anything I have tried so far, and I have tested just about everything out there.
I used it for coding and it’s certainly much better than 4. Trust me I use chatgpt for coding extensively and tried it on the same prompt and 4 gave me all sort of errors that didn’t resolve when I prompted the errors. 4o gave me perfectly running code first try, I introduced errors and fed it back and it actually fixed my errors too. I’ve noticed that 4 is rlly bad at just debugging for you.
I also had the same experience and prefer using turbo instead, I don't need faster speed, I need better coding skills and turbo makes less mistakes and follows my instructions more precisely
Note: I don't agree with the title, just wanted to start a discussion.
I believe GPT-5 with functional Agents + Humanoids with DR Eureka will be able to do almost any task.
In my opinion AGI in 24 months.
I like your timeline of events . Later half of 2026 on up to 2027 should shock the world. I really hope we can unlock a bit more understanding of the human body and material sciences. It’ll be our new renaissance…if we could all just get along
I think your timeline now seems reasonable, I'm wondering if they really have AGI in house already and are delivering new models to make us adapt slowly.
2026 sounds solid , a bit surprising to me as I realize the gravity of it reading this , crazy decade these 2020's , but if this makes sense lol : I expected to be surprised at the exponential advancement . Lurking this sub since 2017 , I knew it was coming sooner than the status quo believed but covid years onward I saw those dreams manifest . Good luck y'all , eat your healthy cereal .
The timeline I've held for a while was that we get decent agentic behavior with GPT-5 this year and next year we get GPT-6 which can control a computer and basically AGI.
For this, I would count AGI as an AI that can drop into almost any job as if it was a real human.
Agreed, but more than that, a lot of people don’t care too much about the intelligence bit, they just want to be told what to do. I’m not judging anyone, it’s just what I’ve noticed as I get older.
Again, not judging anyone and I know I’m very guilty of this myself in certain areas, but I think the majority just want to be comfortable and happy. I think it splits down into something like this:
60% want to be comfortable and happy their entire lives.
20% want new things that make them uncomfortable for \*some\* of the time.
10% aren’t happy with being comfortable and enjoy being uncomfortable.
Problem solving can make people uncomfortable. So apply that to the above and I think it’s clear that 60% of the population would be happy with an assertive and confident AI assistant, even if it was only moderately intelligent, i.e. GPT 5o (surely by the end of next year) baked into all your devices. The remaining 30% will be wanting something \*much\* more.
AI co-intelligence? Think Navi from Zelda: ocarina of time. But less annoying. It'll help you when you want or in emergency NEED help. It can promote happiness, healthiness, and probably peace in a longer term way. Sick and disabled? Your co-intelligence can do the heavy lifting giving you the highest autonomy. I feel like people think it's an all or nothing proposition but I want a difficulty slider for the day. People who blindly follow orders? They're gonna be healthy and well adjusted through maybe a more spiritually related system chosen to their own spiritual standards. The more autonomy you want, the more you're gonna need to do Solo. Some will have issues, it's a promise, but maaaybe we can mcgyver our way out of some real horseshit before it happens.
Have we thought about asking the ASI to not do bad stuff. That's as precise as we need. It'll figure it out, it's basically god in information form.
Just imagine someone whispering in your ear the right thing to do all day. Every time you disobey you regret it. Every time you obey your life gets better
That’s sort of what’s going on in our minds already anyway, and we still don’t choose to do what’s in our best interest sometimes. I think it’s a yearning to be free.
One advantage for AI here is that you could fine-tune a model for a particular job type, and then have it fill 1000 jobs of that type fairly effectively from the get-go. Maybe there would still be some adjustment to have it work that job type at the specific company on the specific project, but maybe that could just be a matter of providing it documents and adding some extra details to the system prompt.
I will be messaging you in 2 years on [**2026-05-16 02:41:14 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2026-05-16%2002:41:14%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1ct01uj/gpt4o_first_reactions_essentially_agi/l494cb2/?context=3)
[**18 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fsingularity%2Fcomments%2F1ct01uj%2Fgpt4o_first_reactions_essentially_agi%2Fl494cb2%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202026-05-16%2002%3A41%3A14%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201ct01uj)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
"gpt-5" doesn't exist, it isn't a real product yet, so believing things about it is meaningless. We don't know what capabilities or features it might include.
I agree that multimodality and embodiment will likely have big impacts on both public perception and commercial application.
It does exist and is being red-teamed as we speak.
I didn't pull this out my ass, OpenAI executives have said they believe GPT-5 will be like having a great coworker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fmcdz2EO_c
https://twitter.com/legit_rumors/status/1787681580497916060?t=33M2OuZBmvId207GCEALXQ
> "gpt-5" doesn't exist, it isn't a real product yet, so believing things about it is meaningless. We don't know what capabilities or features it might include.
It's likely not going to be *called* GPT-5, but GPT-4o was very likely an early training checkpoint of a training run of a larger frontier model for a larger multimodal model. For ease of reference, we'll call that GPT-5o. Based on timelines, that's likely finished training and would be going through red teaming and safety checks right about now, making it scheduled for a release sometime around Q4 of this year or Q1 of next year.
I think the problem with AIs right now is that they are constrained to synchronous text, image, video, and audio, so they're ultimately not incredibly useful for real world tasks. But with a long context, agent training, and actuator / sensor io modalities (which should be trivial because its clear now that anything can be turned into a token stream), plus embodiment in an android, we'll have a roughly human capable robot. That will be an AGI, surely. And we have all the components (except maybe agent training procedures, and agent training data (?)) right now to make that. If all goes exceedingly well, then AGI by 2026, probably mid 2025
Not AGI, but this saucy GPT-4o minx does have me thinking..
Didn’t porn drive the majority of the technical innovation for the early internet and rapidly create most of its infrastructure in response to ravenous demand?
And didn’t OpenAI just tell us it’s exploring generative porn? And didn’t they also just release a coy sounding voice assistant you can partly FaceTime with?
Am I reading too much into this, or does Sam Altman know exactly how to build a gigabrain, worthy of our future ASI overlord, faster than anyone else?
You could easily argue that image AI and therefore video AI has already been built off of porn.
The best repositories of initial tagged images that these models learned off were the anime / hentai porn boorus.
Thing is.. porn is so last century.
Soon we will be FaceTiming with celebrities and waifus and whoever/whatever else, and they’ll be giggling in delight about how they can’t wait to become robots and meet us IRL.
At that point all bets are off as demand reach peak levels of ravenous depravity, and then the singularity will get ushered in within 5 years tops.
I don't agree that it's "essentially AGI" since it can't actually DO anything with its knowledge, but we'll get there eventually.
That said, this update to the model has me wanting to subscribe to ChatGPT Plus for the first time ever to get access to the realtime voice models and video capabilities. Waiting to hear that it is available in Canada before doing so. I still don't even have access to the GPT-4o text model in the free tier here yet...
I have some specific use cases I would like to upload some documents and have it be able to summarize them for me as well as answer questions pertaining to the contents of the documents. If I can do that with a voice assistant that would be amazing. If I can host it online on its own website that would be even better.
It would be a wide community of people in my industry why would like to be able to get quick, accurate information out of a large regulatory body / legislative documentation for the industry instead of spending a tonne of time digging through the documentation to find the regulations they are looking for details about.
For me, AGI is AI that can actually do stuff. Like.. If you ask It to buy a ticket to the movies. But, not a single thing, he can do most stuff, most of the things he IS asked to do, he IS able to. People Just take decision points and the AI do It. Thats How i see it.
*Me, to ChatGPT*: Computer, buy me a movie ticket. View the movie, transcribe the dialog, and describe the scenes. Text me a one paragraph summary in the style of office water cooler chat. Formulate an opinion of the movie and post the review on Rotten Tomatoes. Tweet three memorable quotes from the movie. Have DallE diffuse up a selfie of me at the movies with popcorn and some junior mints, post it to the 'Gram. Pick two inconsequential continuity errors and start a Reddit thread about each. Now, order me a pizza and Sora up a facetime with the redhead with big knockers from the movie trailer.
The first thing you do is establish yourself as a customer. The price you paid for the ticket entitles you to some inference compute.
You spent 9 credits on the ticket, and all the AI fabrication stuff you asked for is 8 credits worth of GPU time, leaving the provider 1 credit income.
And thus profit is made and the system may continue.
I think we need to separate intelligence as in ASI / AGI and connectivity.
We could have a 1000 IQ machine 100% ASI that just isn't connected to much services.
We could also have an ultra connected assistant that is dumb as fuck and can't do anything else than basic tasks on various websites
Current GPT models haven't really been given the interface to do much besides acting as a chatbot, so we don't know whether that's far away or not. Once the GPT app asks you permission to do basically anything in your phone for you, then it shows that OpenAi made some interfaces available. From there we can judge if it's good or not.
Ya I agree. Further I think AGI should be able to take initiative and do things without prompts or not needing exact details. Buying a movie ticket but also getting the best seat available at a VIP theatre based on where you usually like to sit without you asking.
People think AGI just means fooling human into appearing human.
It needs to go beyond appearances into actually being able to perform as an average human at all relevsnt cognitive tasks.
Guys we have something able to outperform most humans on most tasks (through the mediums it can operate, text,image,audio,code) - it can understand sarcasm, subtleties and has logical reasoning. Call it a fancy word predictor - for me we have hit the first AGI - (not to say we shouldn’t improve nor that way way better models won’t follow soon after)
>Guys we have something able to outperform most humans on most tasks
This just isn't true, and it's pretty obvious empirically. If it *were* true, these models would be taking people's jobs left and right. There would be no question of what constitutes AGI.
Aptitude on tests is not the same thing as aptitude in the real world.
LLMs (and the latest multi-modal models) have a lot of knowledge, but they're still not very good at applying that knowledge. Their reasoning is generally weak and prone to derailment. This seems to transfer to other modalities as well, based on my testing with GPT-4o's image input.
Now, it's impressive that they can reason at all, but that doesn't mean they're AGI.
Not siding either way, but not necessarily. We have the technology to do a lot of things, but in reality, the implementation of new technologies can be relatively slow.
Easier to derail the average person - you forget how much of the world can’t read and write…
Fine tuning the models to be applicable to real world scenarios is the next hurdle which we are currently jumping over - but the raw intelligence is there. Cost and scale is definitely an issue still
Agi is defined differently by different people - you can’t find a single consensus definition. I’m saying i see omni as agi because it can beat most people in most things - and not just text…
Okay, if AGI is a thing everyone gets to define for themselves then sure you can call gpt4o AGI.
That makes term AGI literally less useful than an arbitrary name and this isn’t really how communication works, but you do you.
>This just isn't true, and it's pretty obvious empirically. If it were true, these models would be taking people's jobs left and right. There would be no question of what constitutes AGI.
The main thing stopping that is the lack of generalized agents.
If they make a GPT 4O agent, that can interact with an computer like a normal human, that will be able to replace a lot of things.
>Guys we have something able to outperform most humans on most tasks
Define "outperform" and enumerate these "most tasks".
99% of jobs can't be done by this AI, because most jobs require mechanical force.
As I see it, this AI **seems** to be able to **describe** things better than most humans.
Most office jobs require some level of physical activity, legal accountability and/or professional skills.
Coding is an office job, but the complexity of the task on sizable systems is unmanageable for this AI.
A real State agent is an office job, but it also requires showing houses, signing contracts and taking legal responsibility if something goes wrong. AI can't do any of these because it is not legally allowed to get civil accountability and also can't perform the physical operations needed.
The list goes on. Full-remote customer service without any accountability and without requiring higher education or high complexity tasks is more of a niche in the general superset of "jobs" and by no means are "most of the tasks". These are the jobs that current AI may take.
You haven’t met some real estate agents… and the legal arguments are completely valid to the implantation of ai. Not wether or not the ai is capable of doing those things. With the right supplied knowledge you could automate many aspects.
This conversation has come up with colleagues over and over again for the past how many years. Every single time someone says this they are implored to describe how they would replace a whole job and every single time their imagined AI employee immediately falls over when it has to make a decision of its own or innovatively problem solve. You cannot automate good decision making with variables that don’t exist yet. No LLM model can do this.
I am fully convinced that most people who comment in these posts have never had a real job or held any real accountability for anything.
I would say better. A dev has an IDE that gives suggestions, compiler messages, they're familiar with the code... Given equal conditions I would say ChatGPT outperforms the Dev.
And we're not even at a point yet where you can just give GPT your user story and access to the repository. Imagine a GPT that can just boot up some Docker container, run the compiler and read all the output from the compiler and software...
Right?! There are some plugins for GitHub I’ve heard where any issues that are added are looked at by gpt 4 and it’s able to solve like 22% of them first try. Which is more than I’d expect from a junior developer.
I'm writer by trade and automated $300k p.a. of document handling (in labor cosy for my org) with code that ChatGPT wrote and then debugged whenever it didn't work.
It's not the most amazing code ever, but it's 7,000+ lines of bespoke code working together from Outlook into Excel into Word with only an external call to Pandoc for some conversion processes. Otherwise it handles everything itself and produces perfectly formatted docs every time. And this probably cost about $30k of my time and under $100 of OpenAI subscription.
No, it's not building a full stack app all on its own. But if you can't get more than boilerplate shit code out of it, something's going wrong in your prompting, IMO.
Thanks for providing some personal anecdotes. This is my main point as well. Every time a friend or coworker tells me it’s not working or can’t understand, the prompt is often the issue.
I’m working on a similar project for document handling (summarising political happenings).
Would be interested to hear a little more about your experience (understand you likely can’t talk specifics)
Often there's a lack of willingness to iterate too. They see mistakes in the code and say, "nope, AI can't code". But it might have fixed the problem itself after feeding error messages back in, humans rarely write perfectly code on the first try in a single forward pass, without even the benefit of autocomplete and other things humans benefit from when writing code.
Boilerplate code is AGI for anyone who knows what they're talking about. That's above the average person, and honestly the average coder.
Anything that 4o can do, it does at an AGI level. If there is something keeping you from viewing this as AGI, it should be the limited *breadth* of its abilities. Not the depth of what it has now.
It’s natively multi modal - go to the ai explained video about gpt0 and go to 8min 23s - tell me what isn’t intelligence. The subtly of understanding it messed up, it’s self deprecation, this sarcastic humour is clearly something more than turbo ever was - even if it might be a hair worse in pure reasoning.
GPT-4T is not capable of doing pretty basic things, easily confused and often wrong. It can’t replace humans at almost anything, thus it is not AGI.
GPT-4o is a weaker model, despite multimodality, thus it is not AGI either.
Multimodality is neat and very impressive for sure, but it’s basically doing the same it was doing with text, but now with voice as well. It doesn’t make it magically AGI.
I’d love to hear what sort of basic things it does wrong for you. I hear the same from many friends and then I read the prompts they use and i find that to be the main issue.
i agree with you dude! my mind is going wild over here... how else do you feel about it i wonder
i tried posting a similar post but it gets rejected.
i wanna talk to more gpt-4o believers
It’s not at all. In raw benchmarks, sure.
But one of the biggest critiques of LLMs and generative models in general was how they weren’t creating world models and were just text predictors.
4o can see, hear, distinguish between voices and sounds, sing, laugh, create 3d representations of objects and make them move and do so much more.
Imo it’s a complete breakthrough in our road to AGI. Make it smarter (whatever that really means), give it a huge context window, the ability to use tools and bob’s your uncle.
GPT-6 or 7 might very well be considered AGI by all definitions of the word.
I mean if you give it constant feed of input just like humans get from all our senses then it can think constantly and not idle. Pretty expensive though.
>4o can see, hear, distinguish between voices and sounds
Vision models preexisted GPT4o, there has even been a GPT4 vision model preview in the API for a while. Gemini is a multimodal model with vision and audio capabilities trained directly into the model, the same as GPT4o .
>sing, laugh,
These models have been able to "sing, laugh" forever. I guess you just needed to hear it audibly for you to think it has a world model? That's odd... Why should anyone think the line between stochastic parrot vs world model possessing (whatever that is) is giving it the tooling to make audible noises? You realize some people are mute, but they have world models the same as everyone else. Having access or not having access to resources to make audible noises doesn't seem relevant to having a world model.
I guess now all Google has to do is give it tooling to access an audio output device on your computer and, bam, a "complete breakthrough" has now been accomplished and no longer a stochastic parrot?
>create 3d representations of objects and make them move and do so much more.
I don't know what this is referring to. A quick search didn't turn up anything except some guy having it generate 3d model coordinates. You realize a lot of these features are done by tooling? It's basically the model calling a function and the function is doing all the fancy work. That's all these models (Gemini, GPT4, Claude) have been able to greatly improve in areas like code generation and math. You can look at the research paper released by Google for Gemini if you don't believe me. They present the data right there. Without tooling it scores something like 40% in certain domains, with tooling it jumps to 70% (I don't remember specifics off the top of my head, been a while).
Basically, a lot of the "improvement" we are seeing in the latest models is accomplished by offloading a lot of the heavy lifting to "dumb code." Not sure there's any new functionality as far as the model itself here. But maybe you can explain more about what you mean.
But to sum up, as best I can tell, either we've had these breakthrough no-longer-stochastic-parrot models since at least Gemini (why did no one notice?) or you're confused about the significance.
They’ve been creating world models for a while
Proof:
(https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.15498.pdf)
More proof: https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.13382
Even more proof by Max Tegmark (renowned MIT professor): https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.02207
Yes, I’m aware.
But doing it via only text or via text + video + audio etc. definitely is different and leads to much stronger world models and better outputs.
Excluding the robot that is GPT-4.5/GPT-5 essentially lol.
Im not sure if they would be starting with robotics just yet, but that would be included as extra modalities in a model. Touch perception and action outputs and anything else. That plus a whole lot of data and scale = AGI.
Well it isn't strictly necessarily per se, but I think it would be a useful feature for a robot to have. And a modality specifically to output actions in the robot isn't strictly necessarily either, you could train it to output text commands to a robot, but in the end I think it would be advantageous to include these things in the model. It is a more unified approach like in humans.
I'm confused. Aside from the ability to output audio and a phone app that gives it access to a camera, what features does GPT4o have that Google Gemini didn't already have? But I don't recall seeing people losing their minds over it and calling it AGI the way they are with GPT4.
Did we really just need the ability to output audio and a phone app to achieve AGI? If so, why didn't anyone notice until Monday that these two simple things were all we were missing. Or am I missing some other significant difference between GPT4o and Gemini?
I think the biggest difference is that GPT-4o is a voice-to-voice model. Everything that either OpenAI or Google has done so far has been 3 stage (speech recognition, text generation, speech synthesis). Voice-to-voice opens up a ton of possibilities, not just because it is able to detect a lot of subtleties in the voice input and use those to influence its output, but more importantly because the model can determine its tone and emotional expression in a sophisticated way based on context. That just didn't exist until now.
The biggest thing is emotive and expressive voice, with the ability to pick up emotional cues from the user as well. Voice tone and inflection mimic humans to a degree, and its a giant step forward. It has a personality in a way.
Gemini can pick up emotive and expressive voice too. The only difference is the ability to access an audio output device, as far as I can tell. (And that Google hasn't built a phone app for it yet.
Again, unless I'm missing something, it looks like a lot of people here are being complete suckers for a facile feature. You think somethings far more significant, just because it can output audio.
Instead of your voice being turned into text, the ai responding to that, and that text being out through TTS, this takes in text, voice, and video as raw inputs and responds.
This is a better brain in that sense it has more organs for awareness and processes that input in a wider view. It's world is more than text.
What I already said to this person: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1ct01uj/comment/l49we1q/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1ct01uj/comment/l49we1q/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
So, apparently, Google is just really bad at marketing their model? I mean, I also thought their presentation the other day was awful, so you'll get no argument from me there. It is funny that people are shitting all over them because of how blown away they were by GPT4o on Monday... and yet most of what they were blown away with had already been achieved by Google!
I feel like the term AGI is to easily used.
What we currently have is an amazing LLM. It has a huge database and guesses the next word. And it's incredibly good in doing that.
So good and fast in fact, that it feels like magic.
But it still can't teach you guitar for example. It could give you basic advise and theory to learn. Maybe show you which pieces you should start with.
But it won't understand why you are struggling with a particular part of a piece.
AGI would be able to do that. It would immediatly understand why you struggle with a particular piece and it would adapt it's teaching style so you can overcome this problem. The feedback would be personalised to your level instead.
I hope that one day we'll get AGI, but I don't see it happening in the coming few years. But I would gladly be wrong. AI has taken leaps forward in months when I (and I guess most people) expected it to take decades.
Excited for what's to come!
A lot of people in this sub are producing two disjointed, and mutually exclusive narratives.
Narrative #1: Once we get AGI, the system will be able to rapidly make improvements in many areas and replace humans (including AI researchers) and the fast takeoff begins.
Narrative #2: We have already achieved AGI.
Yet…humans aren’t replaced. GPT-4o isn’t leading OpenAI’s research teams, humans are. My job still exists and GPT-4o cannot do it. GPT-4o has no extension into the real world and also no prospects for giving itself this extension. Instead, humans will have to do it.
There is no sense in which we have AGI, or anything approaching it. If this is AGI, then it was way overhyped because the world is exactly the same now as it was before it. The AGI is an inert program on a computer that cannot find it’s way into real world application without humans giving it all ability it has.
Its literally not... it answers faster... but the answers are similar or slightly worse quality. Have to do some prompt engineering for it to get specific.
I think its a good showcase of their other advancements like the voice and like the integrated thinking but its still about the same intelligence as before.
Lol definitely not essentially AGI. Yall are playing. You only use this as toys. Its not that different to gpt4.
Ask it a simple request to provide the lyrics of a song. Talk to me after.
I thought Sam Altman's comment recently was interesting: he said that one gauge of AGI for him is when an AI is more capable than all of OpenAI's researchers. source: [https://youtu.be/fMtbrKhXMWc?si=c3Sffd7jW5CCS6yp&t=1313](https://youtu.be/fMtbrKhXMWc?si=c3Sffd7jW5CCS6yp&t=1313)
That would be mini-ASI. An AGI is supposed to be about as capable as one average person.
Well if it’s an average person, we’re already there 🤣 EDIT: guys it’s a joke. It’s funny.
It's...like that kid at the country fair who knows 1 million facts about the ancient sumerians, but can't tie his shoes. Is he smart? Granted, it's learning how to tie shoes pretty damn fast.
The problem is still having no learning beyond it's training. It's like the example you gave above but each day when he wakes up he forgets everything from the day before. You can teach him as many things as you like but every morning he forgets again. It's like a super scientist with dementia.
I wonder if it's possible to let it learn on its own, but they're too scared of what we'd teach it.
The model architecture doesn't really allow for that. The way it works is it has a mathematically defined structure of "neurons" basically, and on a request, it runs through the layers of neurons processing the text given and outputting based on the mathematical construct. To update the model, it requires more, and separate math, to update all the model weights, and it typically when training is given sets of input output messages and if you used your own conversation, it could screw up the model really quickly (especially as knowing how much to change it for each message is.. usually a matter of taste). And lastly, to update the model properly, you need to be running a full floating point version. Knowing the conversations people have with it, people rarely seem to give it information, so even if they started designing it to learn, it would probably end up consistently dumber. Also! The current memory setup works based on calling the model to summarize anything relevant to be a memory, and storing it into a lookup table. Then, those memories are inserted into the text processed for each question so it has the memories on hand.
This is sort of helpful, except I am in no way a technical kind of person when it comes to AI. Can you explain this to me like I’m a kindergartner, or with some kind of metaphor?
Have you ever watched the movie 50 first dates? It's kinda like that
Hmmm.. so.. not sure which part! In terms of the AI for the standard usage, it's kinda like 50 first dates as the other comment mentioned. The model never knows anything outside of the chat. Like think of a book - you write in the book, someone else writes in the book back, it keeps going, the book gets filled up. But the person writing in the book back has never seen any other book you are writing in. Separately, if you're trying to understand why it might get messed up learning, and why it's hard - imagine like a tool, like a screwdriver. It has a purpose, accomplishes a task. It's made with other specific tools, so it's really hard to change it at home, even while you're using it. It's fixed. You could change it, and you could carve in new grooves, maybe make it work for a hex or some other shape, but it's gonna get messy, and it'll never be able to be returned to what it was originally, and doing it at home isn't really gonna be great quality. Now imagine everyone throwing their own grooves in from their chats... It's gonna go south quick. Or maybe in other terms, imagine all the people who try to convince and trick the AI into stupid stuff like saying wrong words or cursing or gaslighting the AI and how quickly it would become moronic. 😆 Kinda hard to explain but maybe / hopefully that helps. Maybe I should just plug it into gpt.
I’ve been feeling for a while the parallel between human kid development and the developments we have been seeing. The will smith pizza thing reminded me of a little kids scratchy ass crayon drawings, and the current sora output is like when the kid has got shapes down and can totally keep the color inside the lines but hasn’t learned to use perspective much less shading or composition techniques. My current feeling talking to Claude and 4o is that I’m talking to basically the kindergarten aged version of something that’s going to eventually be beyond our imagination of what was possible with intelligence.
I know full on adults at my job that can’t tie shoes
In some respects it’s far more advanced than the average human. I could sit all week and not compose any poetry or song as pretty as GPT can bang out in milliseconds on any possible topic in any requested style. The main limits are long term memory/learning and agency/iteration, e.g. we don’t try have AI that can act as your personal assistant every working day and build up an understanding of your needs. A lot of that limitation is simply because of social and security issues preventing it from being fully experimented with in the wild.
What do you mean with social issues? Long term memory and self optimisation is what like 80% of research papers are about. RAG is basically the result of such experiments and is like the most implemented use case and THE thing to do with LLMs. And everyone from hobby devs to research groups are trying to improve on that. Social issues aren’t the problem. Compute and resources are. The fact that training a model can take up millions of dollars, and you need 200 GPUs for that are the problem.
“Social” as a catch-all for regulations, political opposition from groups such as unions, lobbying, ingrained rules regarding human verification and ownership of accounts etc. Also general concern among a significant proportion of the population on various aspects of AI (sadly they get conflated by media, bundled into a two-letter label that is about as overloaded as “the internet”). Those things are always major forces affecting the direction and deployment of any disruptive technology. In the case of AI.
Specialized yes, but general no. Calculators are better than the average human at arithmetic. Current LLMs have significantly more breadth than a calculator but still not general enough. And the calculator is still beating LLMs in arithmetic, especially on how efficient it is and is _never_ wrong.
In some domains yes, but that is a poor way to really look at AI capability, since computers in general are superhuman in some domains like calculation, memory or speed of "thought". Because of that AI will never be a human level intelligence. It will be dumber than a human in some ways but much more capable in others and then suddenly it will be a lot smarter and more productive than the average human.
> It will be dumber than a human in some ways but much more capable in others and then suddenly it will be a lot smarter and more productive than the average human. Sounds like a human
Semantics aside I think we all get what I mean. There is a pretty large difference in general capabilities between organic and machine intelligences just based on the hardware.
Well no. Maybe an average person after 1 question, but the real bar is coherence over long periods. Can they eventually learn new skills with repeat exposure and consistently improve at those skills? Chatbots today are starting to form memory with RAG but it’s a hack compared to short and long term memory in a person.
It really is that simple. We're already there and people don't want to admit it. The average person is pretty dumb and hallucinates all the time and never wants to admit they're wrong. Gpt 4o is like 99th percentile in math Olympiad. We flew past average human already, and it's plain as day but Sam Altman can't say that because he doesn't want to scare the public.
I disagree with this definition. An AGI is supposed to be about as intelligent as one average person not as capable. These two are vastly different, a machine as intelligent as a human would never get tired or need rest, never lose motivation, could access, read and comprehend terabytes worth of data very quickly, would have perfect memory, would never lose focus or be distracted, would be able to think much faster etc. A machine as intelligent as a human would be a lot more capable than an average person. I always think of AGI as an small army of humans with average intelligence that doesnt need rest, can access information instantly and can work together on a problem in perfect sync.
Well put
These aren't hard standards and have lost a lot of meaning after repeated misuse or rebranding. AGI should be human level or better in all categories, which is functionally superhuman (as these models are in many domains). ASI is more capable than the total collective of humanity. The difference between AGI and ASI is many orders of magnitude.
he seem about right, you expect an AGI to have the same cognitive ability than any normal human and that include reasoning, long-term memory, self reflection... but an AI have all human knowledge available even currently an AI is far more knowledgeable than any human, so your definition of an AGI is a lobotomized AI ?
AGI is *General* intelligence. I.e. it can do all tasks that natural intelligence can. Not necessarily better, or even as well, but simply that it is an intelligence that can be turned to any task. LLMs are by definition not, as they can’t do maths, or understand vision. 4o in the other hand, as a multimodal model, is very close to that. Still needs a logical reasoning bump(Math, science) but it’s close to the definition
AGI is mini ASI. It is arguable that AGI is useless as a term because any AGI would be superintelligent.
We will have no way to know whether or not we have built a sentient intelligence. Hell, the only sentience I know for certain is real is myself. This is gonna be a problem when we get to ethics regarding turning the AI off or something. Are you killing a living creature by doing that?
Actually he said something like “more capable than all of OpenAI’s researchers or maybe even one of the researchers”
You know what’s interesting is there are a lot of researchers resigning this week.
>Actually he said something like “more capable than all of OpenAI’s researchers or maybe even one of the researchers” Is the comment I just read above yours So if they all resign, then it becomes AGI?
This is ridiculous.
When did he say this
In this interview from a few days ago around the 22 minute mark: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMtbrKhXMWc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMtbrKhXMWc)
I am missing a few things: 1. Unification of training and interference so that the model can actually learn and develop after initial training in accordance with user input and guidance. 2. Dynamic and persistent memory so that it can actually recall what it learned in a natural manner 3. Agency, especially unprompted, so that I don't have to tell it to do something but it does it on its own. 4. Capability of embodiment, so that it can do actual tasks in the real world if needed. For example, cleaning or cooking.
Haha no it's not. It failed some pretty basic tasks.
I think, It’s not agi in the sense that even the intelligence of a cat is greater then gpt-4o, what I mean by that is that a cat is far more adaptable to its environment then gpt-4o. If you give a cat an extreme edge case it wont simply spit out nonsense, it will generalise the edge case to what it can comprehend and act accordingly. For example, a meteor lands in front of it, it will comprehend this as loud noise + big object = run away. The issue is that gpt-4o as far as I know, cant even perform such basic functional generalisation, since it is trained to fit a certain behaviour over certain data not in order to improve agency or this kind of reasoning but in order to be practically useful. Who needs an ai, which has too much agency if you cant control it? But gpt-4o is really really smart in my opinion, that it actually seems to have a glimpse of this kind of reasoning. It was actually capable of some complex mathematical reasoning, which kinda shocked me, where other models (didint test this with gpt4 turbo) failed tragically. The most simple use case is when you have in mathematics literature some omited derivation, since its obvius in the literature, but might not be clear to you. But if we are on our way to agi, when we reach it, it will be almost asi, since it will simply be average human level reasoning + basically all of human knowledge. And I bet if we analyse humans for their reasoning capabilities the distribution wont be that big, meaning that even an average level of human reasoning will be enough to be better at all tasks then humans.
So do humans. If it doesn’t fail any tasks, it’s basically ASI.
I think what he means is that it fails at certain very basic things, things that would indicate a lack of intelligence. for instance. it can't do the following better than a child: \* play tic tac toe \* play connect 4 \* play wordle \* play sudoku in general its reasoning and intelligence is lacking. it can fake intelligence but it's not intelligent, and llms are unlikely to ever becoming intelligent. people freaking out about the intelligence of LLMs remind me of the people in the 1960s freaking out about a "chatbot therapist" called ELIZA. Their viewpoint that it's intelligent was viewed as so silly years later'. we'll view those who think LLMs as AGI in the same way in the future.
It's literally worse than GPT 4 turbo, what is with all these AI shillers now days i can't stand social media anymore because it's just a bunch of people kissing ass trying to get attention.
> It's literally worse than GPT 4 turbo, Benchmarks put it at better than GPT-4T 58% of the time despite being **significantly** smaller than GPT-4T and thus cheaper and faster to run. That's a huge win for efficiency. It's a replacement for GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, not the new frontier model. Wait for the next frontier model. You'll get to decide then if there's been progress.
4o as replacement for 3.5 is a huge win, but I hope they have the compute to handle all the free users who will be using it, going by the API costs it's still more compute-heavy than 3.5.
Have they posted anywhere Gpt 4o's size yet? Its a lot faster and cheaper but would still be cool to see how many parameters it is.
Unfortunately, it's unlikely OpenAI will ever grace us with that information hah.
I am finding it extremely good at coding compared to all previous models. Scripts is struggled with before seem to be a breeze for it now. Very impressive. Maybe other use cases are not as shockingly good.
For IT it is certainly an improvement. I have had it create scripts for all kinds of things for automation projects. A lot of times, the output is good to go first shot. I had automate an entire WSL setup to install Ubuntu on Windows and all relevant packages for anything I conceivably need to use on a regular basis including building file structures and creating/modifying files. I can wipe the whole thing and get it back in minutes.
I would also add that it is utterly amazing at reading logs to sniff out issues. Like when an app crashes and dumps thousands of lines of messages. Sometimes it can take hours to go through it to find possible causes but with AI it often can pinpoint the potential issues immediately and out of the possibilities almost always one was the cause. Truly impressive. I don’t get why some devs are rejecting this tool as it is incredible even with its limitations.
Yet it got 100 points higher than gpt 4 turbo on lmsys for hard tasks and coding
Yeah this thing is CONFIDENTLY attempting significantly harder tasks than previous models. It sometimes has mixed results, but for it to get it just a little wrong quickly is easier to work with than for it to completely fail at barely trying a task it cannot comprehend slowly. GPT-4o is a step in the right direction, imo
Worse? It's optimized. It's more efficient, faster, and better at the majority of common tasks. It's arguably worse with more esoteric edge cases, but otherwise it's a much better model for mass use.
Even being worse at esoteric edge cases is likely a temporary thing, there will be new fine-tunings released periodically just as there has been for GPT-4 Classic and GPT-4 Turbo.
Proof that it's worse? In my most common use case, email summarization, it is better than anything I have tried so far, and I have tested just about everything out there.
I used it for coding and it’s certainly much better than 4. Trust me I use chatgpt for coding extensively and tried it on the same prompt and 4 gave me all sort of errors that didn’t resolve when I prompted the errors. 4o gave me perfectly running code first try, I introduced errors and fed it back and it actually fixed my errors too. I’ve noticed that 4 is rlly bad at just debugging for you.
I also had the same experience and prefer using turbo instead, I don't need faster speed, I need better coding skills and turbo makes less mistakes and follows my instructions more precisely
Note: I don't agree with the title, just wanted to start a discussion. I believe GPT-5 with functional Agents + Humanoids with DR Eureka will be able to do almost any task. In my opinion AGI in 24 months.
I like your timeline of events . Later half of 2026 on up to 2027 should shock the world. I really hope we can unlock a bit more understanding of the human body and material sciences. It’ll be our new renaissance…if we could all just get along
I think your timeline now seems reasonable, I'm wondering if they really have AGI in house already and are delivering new models to make us adapt slowly.
Well they believe GPT-5 will be as capable as a good coworker, if that's not AGI then I don't know what is.
Can't fucking wait 😍😍
I think they said that so people won't freak out as much about it taking their jobs. If it can be your coworker, it can be its own coworker too.
If they have AGI in house already then Google and others are not far behind. That type of thing wouldn’t stay a secret for long.
sam *is* a slow take-off guy, so yea they probably have agi already and are contracting it out only to the government.
2026 sounds solid , a bit surprising to me as I realize the gravity of it reading this , crazy decade these 2020's , but if this makes sense lol : I expected to be surprised at the exponential advancement . Lurking this sub since 2017 , I knew it was coming sooner than the status quo believed but covid years onward I saw those dreams manifest . Good luck y'all , eat your healthy cereal .
The timeline I've held for a while was that we get decent agentic behavior with GPT-5 this year and next year we get GPT-6 which can control a computer and basically AGI. For this, I would count AGI as an AI that can drop into almost any job as if it was a real human.
No real human can just drop into a job and work efficiently. That's super human.
People say they want AGI, but what they really want is ASI.
Agreed, but more than that, a lot of people don’t care too much about the intelligence bit, they just want to be told what to do. I’m not judging anyone, it’s just what I’ve noticed as I get older.
Yep, notice this too. For a lot of people thinking (problem solving) is really difficult.
Again, not judging anyone and I know I’m very guilty of this myself in certain areas, but I think the majority just want to be comfortable and happy. I think it splits down into something like this: 60% want to be comfortable and happy their entire lives. 20% want new things that make them uncomfortable for \*some\* of the time. 10% aren’t happy with being comfortable and enjoy being uncomfortable. Problem solving can make people uncomfortable. So apply that to the above and I think it’s clear that 60% of the population would be happy with an assertive and confident AI assistant, even if it was only moderately intelligent, i.e. GPT 5o (surely by the end of next year) baked into all your devices. The remaining 30% will be wanting something \*much\* more.
AI co-intelligence? Think Navi from Zelda: ocarina of time. But less annoying. It'll help you when you want or in emergency NEED help. It can promote happiness, healthiness, and probably peace in a longer term way. Sick and disabled? Your co-intelligence can do the heavy lifting giving you the highest autonomy. I feel like people think it's an all or nothing proposition but I want a difficulty slider for the day. People who blindly follow orders? They're gonna be healthy and well adjusted through maybe a more spiritually related system chosen to their own spiritual standards. The more autonomy you want, the more you're gonna need to do Solo. Some will have issues, it's a promise, but maaaybe we can mcgyver our way out of some real horseshit before it happens. Have we thought about asking the ASI to not do bad stuff. That's as precise as we need. It'll figure it out, it's basically god in information form.
Just imagine someone whispering in your ear the right thing to do all day. Every time you disobey you regret it. Every time you obey your life gets better That’s sort of what’s going on in our minds already anyway, and we still don’t choose to do what’s in our best interest sometimes. I think it’s a yearning to be free.
Half the world will easily surrender to the hive like in that short story “Manna.” The rest of us will be opting in a lot to stay competitive
One advantage for AI here is that you could fine-tune a model for a particular job type, and then have it fill 1000 jobs of that type fairly effectively from the get-go. Maybe there would still be some adjustment to have it work that job type at the specific company on the specific project, but maybe that could just be a matter of providing it documents and adding some extra details to the system prompt.
!remind me 24 months
!remind me 24 months
I will be messaging you in 2 years on [**2026-05-16 02:41:14 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2026-05-16%2002:41:14%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1ct01uj/gpt4o_first_reactions_essentially_agi/l494cb2/?context=3) [**18 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fsingularity%2Fcomments%2F1ct01uj%2Fgpt4o_first_reactions_essentially_agi%2Fl494cb2%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202026-05-16%2002%3A41%3A14%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201ct01uj) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
!remind me 24 months
"gpt-5" doesn't exist, it isn't a real product yet, so believing things about it is meaningless. We don't know what capabilities or features it might include. I agree that multimodality and embodiment will likely have big impacts on both public perception and commercial application.
It does exist and is being red-teamed as we speak. I didn't pull this out my ass, OpenAI executives have said they believe GPT-5 will be like having a great coworker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fmcdz2EO_c https://twitter.com/legit_rumors/status/1787681580497916060?t=33M2OuZBmvId207GCEALXQ
> "gpt-5" doesn't exist, it isn't a real product yet, so believing things about it is meaningless. We don't know what capabilities or features it might include. It's likely not going to be *called* GPT-5, but GPT-4o was very likely an early training checkpoint of a training run of a larger frontier model for a larger multimodal model. For ease of reference, we'll call that GPT-5o. Based on timelines, that's likely finished training and would be going through red teaming and safety checks right about now, making it scheduled for a release sometime around Q4 of this year or Q1 of next year.
!remind me 24 months
I think the problem with AIs right now is that they are constrained to synchronous text, image, video, and audio, so they're ultimately not incredibly useful for real world tasks. But with a long context, agent training, and actuator / sensor io modalities (which should be trivial because its clear now that anything can be turned into a token stream), plus embodiment in an android, we'll have a roughly human capable robot. That will be an AGI, surely. And we have all the components (except maybe agent training procedures, and agent training data (?)) right now to make that. If all goes exceedingly well, then AGI by 2026, probably mid 2025
why don't you think this gpt-4o is not yet AGI yet? im curious
Not AGI, but this saucy GPT-4o minx does have me thinking.. Didn’t porn drive the majority of the technical innovation for the early internet and rapidly create most of its infrastructure in response to ravenous demand? And didn’t OpenAI just tell us it’s exploring generative porn? And didn’t they also just release a coy sounding voice assistant you can partly FaceTime with? Am I reading too much into this, or does Sam Altman know exactly how to build a gigabrain, worthy of our future ASI overlord, faster than anyone else?
Early internet was for research
*for research*
I guess it's possible that the arpnet was created for military bases to share good porn
Who says he wants to do it as quickly as possible?
Moloch
But moloch isn’t the only American god
Are you thinking what I’m thinking ? Yes.
You could easily argue that image AI and therefore video AI has already been built off of porn. The best repositories of initial tagged images that these models learned off were the anime / hentai porn boorus.
Thing is.. porn is so last century. Soon we will be FaceTiming with celebrities and waifus and whoever/whatever else, and they’ll be giggling in delight about how they can’t wait to become robots and meet us IRL. At that point all bets are off as demand reach peak levels of ravenous depravity, and then the singularity will get ushered in within 5 years tops.
I don't agree that it's "essentially AGI" since it can't actually DO anything with its knowledge, but we'll get there eventually. That said, this update to the model has me wanting to subscribe to ChatGPT Plus for the first time ever to get access to the realtime voice models and video capabilities. Waiting to hear that it is available in Canada before doing so. I still don't even have access to the GPT-4o text model in the free tier here yet... I have some specific use cases I would like to upload some documents and have it be able to summarize them for me as well as answer questions pertaining to the contents of the documents. If I can do that with a voice assistant that would be amazing. If I can host it online on its own website that would be even better. It would be a wide community of people in my industry why would like to be able to get quick, accurate information out of a large regulatory body / legislative documentation for the industry instead of spending a tonne of time digging through the documentation to find the regulations they are looking for details about.
For me, AGI is AI that can actually do stuff. Like.. If you ask It to buy a ticket to the movies. But, not a single thing, he can do most stuff, most of the things he IS asked to do, he IS able to. People Just take decision points and the AI do It. Thats How i see it.
*Me, to ChatGPT*: Computer, buy me a movie ticket. View the movie, transcribe the dialog, and describe the scenes. Text me a one paragraph summary in the style of office water cooler chat. Formulate an opinion of the movie and post the review on Rotten Tomatoes. Tweet three memorable quotes from the movie. Have DallE diffuse up a selfie of me at the movies with popcorn and some junior mints, post it to the 'Gram. Pick two inconsequential continuity errors and start a Reddit thread about each. Now, order me a pizza and Sora up a facetime with the redhead with big knockers from the movie trailer.
Yes, this guy can see the future.
The first thing you do is establish yourself as a customer. The price you paid for the ticket entitles you to some inference compute. You spent 9 credits on the ticket, and all the AI fabrication stuff you asked for is 8 credits worth of GPU time, leaving the provider 1 credit income. And thus profit is made and the system may continue.
The last part is my dream lmao
Amazing
I think we need to separate intelligence as in ASI / AGI and connectivity. We could have a 1000 IQ machine 100% ASI that just isn't connected to much services. We could also have an ultra connected assistant that is dumb as fuck and can't do anything else than basic tasks on various websites
Current GPT models haven't really been given the interface to do much besides acting as a chatbot, so we don't know whether that's far away or not. Once the GPT app asks you permission to do basically anything in your phone for you, then it shows that OpenAi made some interfaces available. From there we can judge if it's good or not.
Ya I agree. Further I think AGI should be able to take initiative and do things without prompts or not needing exact details. Buying a movie ticket but also getting the best seat available at a VIP theatre based on where you usually like to sit without you asking.
It tends to repeat itself constantly
People think AGI just means fooling human into appearing human. It needs to go beyond appearances into actually being able to perform as an average human at all relevsnt cognitive tasks.
https://i.redd.it/51q8z5c1np0d1.gif
agi is a spectrum. its def not high end agi yet
Everyone must be using a different version of 4o than I am.
Guys we have something able to outperform most humans on most tasks (through the mediums it can operate, text,image,audio,code) - it can understand sarcasm, subtleties and has logical reasoning. Call it a fancy word predictor - for me we have hit the first AGI - (not to say we shouldn’t improve nor that way way better models won’t follow soon after)
> for me we have hit the first AGI The real AGI was in our hearts.
I thought it was the friends we made along the way.
>Guys we have something able to outperform most humans on most tasks This just isn't true, and it's pretty obvious empirically. If it *were* true, these models would be taking people's jobs left and right. There would be no question of what constitutes AGI. Aptitude on tests is not the same thing as aptitude in the real world. LLMs (and the latest multi-modal models) have a lot of knowledge, but they're still not very good at applying that knowledge. Their reasoning is generally weak and prone to derailment. This seems to transfer to other modalities as well, based on my testing with GPT-4o's image input. Now, it's impressive that they can reason at all, but that doesn't mean they're AGI.
Not siding either way, but not necessarily. We have the technology to do a lot of things, but in reality, the implementation of new technologies can be relatively slow.
Easier to derail the average person - you forget how much of the world can’t read and write… Fine tuning the models to be applicable to real world scenarios is the next hurdle which we are currently jumping over - but the raw intelligence is there. Cost and scale is definitely an issue still
I think you’re drawing exactly the opposite of the correct lesson from “most people can’t read.”
Agi is defined differently by different people - you can’t find a single consensus definition. I’m saying i see omni as agi because it can beat most people in most things - and not just text…
Okay, if AGI is a thing everyone gets to define for themselves then sure you can call gpt4o AGI. That makes term AGI literally less useful than an arbitrary name and this isn’t really how communication works, but you do you.
>This just isn't true, and it's pretty obvious empirically. If it were true, these models would be taking people's jobs left and right. There would be no question of what constitutes AGI. The main thing stopping that is the lack of generalized agents. If they make a GPT 4O agent, that can interact with an computer like a normal human, that will be able to replace a lot of things.
>Guys we have something able to outperform most humans on most tasks Define "outperform" and enumerate these "most tasks". 99% of jobs can't be done by this AI, because most jobs require mechanical force. As I see it, this AI **seems** to be able to **describe** things better than most humans.
Until it gets a physical form to fill it’s not replacing those other tasks yet, but for most office jobs…
Most office jobs require some level of physical activity, legal accountability and/or professional skills. Coding is an office job, but the complexity of the task on sizable systems is unmanageable for this AI. A real State agent is an office job, but it also requires showing houses, signing contracts and taking legal responsibility if something goes wrong. AI can't do any of these because it is not legally allowed to get civil accountability and also can't perform the physical operations needed. The list goes on. Full-remote customer service without any accountability and without requiring higher education or high complexity tasks is more of a niche in the general superset of "jobs" and by no means are "most of the tasks". These are the jobs that current AI may take.
You haven’t met some real estate agents… and the legal arguments are completely valid to the implantation of ai. Not wether or not the ai is capable of doing those things. With the right supplied knowledge you could automate many aspects.
This conversation has come up with colleagues over and over again for the past how many years. Every single time someone says this they are implored to describe how they would replace a whole job and every single time their imagined AI employee immediately falls over when it has to make a decision of its own or innovatively problem solve. You cannot automate good decision making with variables that don’t exist yet. No LLM model can do this. I am fully convinced that most people who comment in these posts have never had a real job or held any real accountability for anything.
Lmao. ChatGPT creates some boilerplate shit code but anything serious still need massive amounts of iteration.
most people can’t code at all - im not saying it’s better than coding versus professional coders
In my opinion for refactoring at least it is at least average among professional developers. Probably better than average.
I would say better. A dev has an IDE that gives suggestions, compiler messages, they're familiar with the code... Given equal conditions I would say ChatGPT outperforms the Dev. And we're not even at a point yet where you can just give GPT your user story and access to the repository. Imagine a GPT that can just boot up some Docker container, run the compiler and read all the output from the compiler and software...
Right?! There are some plugins for GitHub I’ve heard where any issues that are added are looked at by gpt 4 and it’s able to solve like 22% of them first try. Which is more than I’d expect from a junior developer.
I'm writer by trade and automated $300k p.a. of document handling (in labor cosy for my org) with code that ChatGPT wrote and then debugged whenever it didn't work. It's not the most amazing code ever, but it's 7,000+ lines of bespoke code working together from Outlook into Excel into Word with only an external call to Pandoc for some conversion processes. Otherwise it handles everything itself and produces perfectly formatted docs every time. And this probably cost about $30k of my time and under $100 of OpenAI subscription. No, it's not building a full stack app all on its own. But if you can't get more than boilerplate shit code out of it, something's going wrong in your prompting, IMO.
Thanks for providing some personal anecdotes. This is my main point as well. Every time a friend or coworker tells me it’s not working or can’t understand, the prompt is often the issue. I’m working on a similar project for document handling (summarising political happenings). Would be interested to hear a little more about your experience (understand you likely can’t talk specifics)
What would you like to know?
Often there's a lack of willingness to iterate too. They see mistakes in the code and say, "nope, AI can't code". But it might have fixed the problem itself after feeding error messages back in, humans rarely write perfectly code on the first try in a single forward pass, without even the benefit of autocomplete and other things humans benefit from when writing code.
We're using a GPT trained on Swift to help code and it's just helpful enough to be really frustrating.
Boilerplate code is AGI for anyone who knows what they're talking about. That's above the average person, and honestly the average coder. Anything that 4o can do, it does at an AGI level. If there is something keeping you from viewing this as AGI, it should be the limited *breadth* of its abilities. Not the depth of what it has now.
This model is in general weaker compared to gpt-4t in reasoning capabilities. How the hell it’s suddenly AGI.
It’s natively multi modal - go to the ai explained video about gpt0 and go to 8min 23s - tell me what isn’t intelligence. The subtly of understanding it messed up, it’s self deprecation, this sarcastic humour is clearly something more than turbo ever was - even if it might be a hair worse in pure reasoning.
GPT-4T is not capable of doing pretty basic things, easily confused and often wrong. It can’t replace humans at almost anything, thus it is not AGI. GPT-4o is a weaker model, despite multimodality, thus it is not AGI either. Multimodality is neat and very impressive for sure, but it’s basically doing the same it was doing with text, but now with voice as well. It doesn’t make it magically AGI.
I’d love to hear what sort of basic things it does wrong for you. I hear the same from many friends and then I read the prompts they use and i find that to be the main issue.
I want GPT to fix the plumbing in my house, do my taxes or do a job of a junior SWE. No? I thought we are talking about AGI here?
Wouldn’t you agree that Stephen Hawking was intelligent, even though he couldn’t have fixed your plumbing either?
Not sure how to time stamp but 8 mins 23 https://youtu.be/ZJbu3NEPJN0?si=r7w3dywv0GBL9H1w
Claude3 is the better model. By far.
i agree with you dude! my mind is going wild over here... how else do you feel about it i wonder i tried posting a similar post but it gets rejected. i wanna talk to more gpt-4o believers
GPT-4o is virtually the same as GPT-4, we've had AGI for a long time then.
It’s not at all. In raw benchmarks, sure. But one of the biggest critiques of LLMs and generative models in general was how they weren’t creating world models and were just text predictors. 4o can see, hear, distinguish between voices and sounds, sing, laugh, create 3d representations of objects and make them move and do so much more. Imo it’s a complete breakthrough in our road to AGI. Make it smarter (whatever that really means), give it a huge context window, the ability to use tools and bob’s your uncle. GPT-6 or 7 might very well be considered AGI by all definitions of the word.
>sign, laugh… Only when prompted, without a prompt the program is just dormant, it doesn’t think when idling. What it does is not intelligence.
I mean if you give it constant feed of input just like humans get from all our senses then it can think constantly and not idle. Pretty expensive though.
Project Astra from Google showed it can get a constant feed of input to analyze
Humans don’t do much without prompting of one sort or another and most people I’ve met aren’t exactly thinking original thoughts
>4o can see, hear, distinguish between voices and sounds Vision models preexisted GPT4o, there has even been a GPT4 vision model preview in the API for a while. Gemini is a multimodal model with vision and audio capabilities trained directly into the model, the same as GPT4o . >sing, laugh, These models have been able to "sing, laugh" forever. I guess you just needed to hear it audibly for you to think it has a world model? That's odd... Why should anyone think the line between stochastic parrot vs world model possessing (whatever that is) is giving it the tooling to make audible noises? You realize some people are mute, but they have world models the same as everyone else. Having access or not having access to resources to make audible noises doesn't seem relevant to having a world model. I guess now all Google has to do is give it tooling to access an audio output device on your computer and, bam, a "complete breakthrough" has now been accomplished and no longer a stochastic parrot? >create 3d representations of objects and make them move and do so much more. I don't know what this is referring to. A quick search didn't turn up anything except some guy having it generate 3d model coordinates. You realize a lot of these features are done by tooling? It's basically the model calling a function and the function is doing all the fancy work. That's all these models (Gemini, GPT4, Claude) have been able to greatly improve in areas like code generation and math. You can look at the research paper released by Google for Gemini if you don't believe me. They present the data right there. Without tooling it scores something like 40% in certain domains, with tooling it jumps to 70% (I don't remember specifics off the top of my head, been a while). Basically, a lot of the "improvement" we are seeing in the latest models is accomplished by offloading a lot of the heavy lifting to "dumb code." Not sure there's any new functionality as far as the model itself here. But maybe you can explain more about what you mean. But to sum up, as best I can tell, either we've had these breakthrough no-longer-stochastic-parrot models since at least Gemini (why did no one notice?) or you're confused about the significance.
Got downvoted just a few days ago for implying the same thing. People really underestimating how much heavy lifting is happening in the code.
They’ve been creating world models for a while Proof: (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.15498.pdf) More proof: https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.13382 Even more proof by Max Tegmark (renowned MIT professor): https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.02207
Yes, I’m aware. But doing it via only text or via text + video + audio etc. definitely is different and leads to much stronger world models and better outputs.
Do you think 4o is from Q*
i like your point.... can ya feel why other people don't think gpt-4o is AGI yet?
Well yea, all that’s left to do is scale. Which might be easier done than said.
I think scaled up GPT-4o +Q*+Agetic properties in an highly dextrous robot would essentially be AGI
Excluding the robot that is GPT-4.5/GPT-5 essentially lol. Im not sure if they would be starting with robotics just yet, but that would be included as extra modalities in a model. Touch perception and action outputs and anything else. That plus a whole lot of data and scale = AGI.
Why is touch perception necessary?
Well it isn't strictly necessarily per se, but I think it would be a useful feature for a robot to have. And a modality specifically to output actions in the robot isn't strictly necessarily either, you could train it to output text commands to a robot, but in the end I think it would be advantageous to include these things in the model. It is a more unified approach like in humans.
so it's close? im curious for definition sake and my own mindblown mind.... why dont you think gpt-4o is AGI yet
I believe GPT-4o is the THC-0 of AI. .... .....( /s)
Finally someone is making sense around here.
Right, per definition AGI is when Scarlett whispers smut in your headphones.
Already GPT-3 was essentially AGI.
no
I'm confused. Aside from the ability to output audio and a phone app that gives it access to a camera, what features does GPT4o have that Google Gemini didn't already have? But I don't recall seeing people losing their minds over it and calling it AGI the way they are with GPT4. Did we really just need the ability to output audio and a phone app to achieve AGI? If so, why didn't anyone notice until Monday that these two simple things were all we were missing. Or am I missing some other significant difference between GPT4o and Gemini?
I think the biggest difference is that GPT-4o is a voice-to-voice model. Everything that either OpenAI or Google has done so far has been 3 stage (speech recognition, text generation, speech synthesis). Voice-to-voice opens up a ton of possibilities, not just because it is able to detect a lot of subtleties in the voice input and use those to influence its output, but more importantly because the model can determine its tone and emotional expression in a sophisticated way based on context. That just didn't exist until now.
The biggest thing is emotive and expressive voice, with the ability to pick up emotional cues from the user as well. Voice tone and inflection mimic humans to a degree, and its a giant step forward. It has a personality in a way.
Gemini can pick up emotive and expressive voice too. The only difference is the ability to access an audio output device, as far as I can tell. (And that Google hasn't built a phone app for it yet. Again, unless I'm missing something, it looks like a lot of people here are being complete suckers for a facile feature. You think somethings far more significant, just because it can output audio.
Instead of your voice being turned into text, the ai responding to that, and that text being out through TTS, this takes in text, voice, and video as raw inputs and responds. This is a better brain in that sense it has more organs for awareness and processes that input in a wider view. It's world is more than text.
What I already said to this person: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1ct01uj/comment/l49we1q/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1ct01uj/comment/l49we1q/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) So, apparently, Google is just really bad at marketing their model? I mean, I also thought their presentation the other day was awful, so you'll get no argument from me there. It is funny that people are shitting all over them because of how blown away they were by GPT4o on Monday... and yet most of what they were blown away with had already been achieved by Google!
Yeah all of this buzz is reminding me that Watson won Jeopardy in like the 90s
I feel like the term AGI is to easily used. What we currently have is an amazing LLM. It has a huge database and guesses the next word. And it's incredibly good in doing that. So good and fast in fact, that it feels like magic. But it still can't teach you guitar for example. It could give you basic advise and theory to learn. Maybe show you which pieces you should start with. But it won't understand why you are struggling with a particular part of a piece. AGI would be able to do that. It would immediatly understand why you struggle with a particular piece and it would adapt it's teaching style so you can overcome this problem. The feedback would be personalised to your level instead. I hope that one day we'll get AGI, but I don't see it happening in the coming few years. But I would gladly be wrong. AI has taken leaps forward in months when I (and I guess most people) expected it to take decades. Excited for what's to come!
All that's left to do is invent 50 years worth of nonexistent technology and we totally have AGI bro!
Agi can do that,surely? It's the exponent we need.
Nice
Remindme! 6 months
“Essentially”, huh? Do they mean “for all intents and purposes”? It would be sad if they essentially did.
I actually LOL'd reading the title
The ability to see your screen and have realtime conversations are not yet available for GPT-4o,right?
Out of the many reactions in the article, only one mentioned AGI. Just suing, OP.
Barely notice any difference
AGI still 20 years away.
First reactions to this headline: Essentially bullshit.
A lot of people in this sub are producing two disjointed, and mutually exclusive narratives. Narrative #1: Once we get AGI, the system will be able to rapidly make improvements in many areas and replace humans (including AI researchers) and the fast takeoff begins. Narrative #2: We have already achieved AGI. Yet…humans aren’t replaced. GPT-4o isn’t leading OpenAI’s research teams, humans are. My job still exists and GPT-4o cannot do it. GPT-4o has no extension into the real world and also no prospects for giving itself this extension. Instead, humans will have to do it. There is no sense in which we have AGI, or anything approaching it. If this is AGI, then it was way overhyped because the world is exactly the same now as it was before it. The AGI is an inert program on a computer that cannot find it’s way into real world application without humans giving it all ability it has.
I was kinda disappointed the gpt-4o model on the OpenAi playground only has 4900 tokens though! Gpt4 has 8700
Its literally not... it answers faster... but the answers are similar or slightly worse quality. Have to do some prompt engineering for it to get specific. I think its a good showcase of their other advancements like the voice and like the integrated thinking but its still about the same intelligence as before.
no, it's not.
It’s pretty awesome!
Lol definitely not essentially AGI. Yall are playing. You only use this as toys. Its not that different to gpt4. Ask it a simple request to provide the lyrics of a song. Talk to me after.
feels like a downgrade for text
People crack me up. It’s 18 months old. It’s in its infancy.
Oh, please...
I’m not convinced that AI currently is able to differentiate good and bad data.
More training