Rethinking AGI: 'general' should mean trainable to do anything, not zero-shot everything
daniel_mac8 · x · 2026-09-09
danielmac8 inverts Greg Kamradt's definition of AGI: since humans as the existence proof of general intelligence can't do many things without training, 'general' should mean a machine mind trainable to do anything. Kamradt adds that with frozen weights (as with Astra), capability gains must come from external memory and self-built tools — what matters is what a model can achieve over time through building its own tools, not one-shot performance.
Related event: ARC Prize Founder and Community Debates What "General" in AGI Means(5 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- 'Half the sites I try via agents block access' — the anti-bot paradox holding back the agentic economy — XFreeze · 2026-10-27
- US chases AGI dominance while China, EU and ASEAN treat AI as public infrastructure — BubblyExtent1693 · 2026-10-27
- Lab monkeys at $30-80K each: a 4-year breeding cycle is the real preclinical drug bottleneck — zebird0 · 2026-10-27
- CJR: journalists should stop hyping AI's supposed humanity — just say 'rogue' — ShakeelHashim · 2026-10-27
- PhD applicant emails up 4x YoY due to AI — writing without AI now makes you stand out — AI4Code · 2026-10-27
- Weil's collapse shows BigLaw dies from eroding belief, not a broken business model — jkubicki · 2026-10-27