The singularity is close?
&gt; Scale is not the solution.<p>Agreed, I don&#x27;t think any modern AI techniques will scale to become generally intelligent. They are very effective at specialized, constrained tasks, but will fail to generalize.<p>&gt; AI will design AGI.<p>I don&#x27;t think that a non-general intelligence can design a general intelligence. Otherwise, the non-general intelligence would be generally intelligent by:<p>1. Take in input.
2. Generate an AGI.
3. Run the AGI on the input.
4. Take the AGI output and return it.<p>If by this, the article means that humans will use existing AI techniques to build AGI, then sure, in the same way humans will use a hammer instead of their hands to hit a nail in. Doesn&#x27;t mean that the &quot;hammer will build a house.&quot;<p>&gt; The ball is already rolling.<p>In terms of people wanting to make AGI, sure. In terms of progress on AGI? I don&#x27;t think we&#x27;re much closer now than we were 30 years ago. We have more tools that mimic intelligence in specific contexts, but are helpless outside of them.<p>&gt; Once an intelligence is loose on the internet, it will be able to learn from all of humanity’s data, replicate and mutate itself infinitely many times, take over physical manufacturing lines remotely, and hack important infrastructure.<p>None of this is a given. If AGI requires specific hardware, it can&#x27;t replicate itself around. If the storage&#x2F;bandwidth requirements for AGI are massive, it can&#x27;t freely copy itself. Sure, it could hack into infrastructure, but so can existing GI (people). Manufacturing lines aren&#x27;t automated in the way this article imagines.<p>The arguments in this post seem more like optimistic wishes rather than reasoned points.