Building AGI when most humans aren't general: maybe our definition of intelligence needs work
VraserX · x · 2026-10-24
The author quips that we're chasing artificial general intelligence while most humans aren't particularly general themselves—a brilliant physicist may struggle with a leaking pipe, a world-class programmer may fail to explain biology. Perhaps, they suggest, our definition of intelligence itself needs rework.
More from AGI Musings
- Planning 80 More Years at Age 80: The Future Worth Building — Dr_Singularity · 2026-10-24
- The real AI-for-Science question: when experiments become programmable — CatAstro_Piyush · 2026-10-24
- AI scholar Dan Faggella: my ideas will be worthless within 2 years — danfaggella · 2026-10-24
- AGI will force radical human transformation, argues Daniel Faggella in new essay — danfaggella · 2026-10-24
- Daniel Miessler: code is the lossy output — the primary artifact is the fully articulated ideal in language — JensHonack · 2026-10-24
- Reid Hoffman asks: in 10 years, can an all-AI-agent VC fund beat a human-and-AI firm? — reidhoffman · 2026-10-24