Instead of a single, generalizable AI, we are creating 'Functional AGI'—a collection of specialized AIs layered together. This system will feel like AGI to users but lacks true cross-domain reasoning, as progress in one area (like coding) doesn't translate to others (like history).
The AI industry is hitting data limits for training massive, general-purpose models. The next wave of progress will likely come from creating highly specialized models for specific domains, similar to DeepMind's AlphaFold, which can achieve superhuman performance on narrow tasks.
The popular conception of AGI as a pre-trained system that knows everything is flawed. A more realistic and powerful goal is an AI with a human-like ability for continual learning. This system wouldn't be deployed as a finished product, but as a 'super-intelligent 15-year-old' that learns and adapts to specific roles.
The popular concept of AGI as a static, all-knowing entity is flawed. A more realistic and powerful model is one analogous to a 'super intelligent 15-year-old'—a system with a foundational capacity for rapid, continual learning. Deployment would involve this AI learning on the job, not arriving with complete knowledge.
Current AI models resemble a student who grinds 10,000 hours on a narrow task. They achieve superhuman performance on benchmarks but lack the broad, adaptable intelligence of someone with less specific training but better general reasoning. This explains the gap between eval scores and real-world utility.
Demis Hassabis explains that current AI models have 'jagged intelligence'—performing at a PhD level on some tasks but failing at high-school level logic on others. He identifies this lack of consistency as a primary obstacle to achieving true Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).
The current focus on pre-training AI with specific tool fluencies overlooks the crucial need for on-the-job, context-specific learning. Humans excel because they don't need pre-rehearsal for every task. This gap indicates AGI is further away than some believe, as true intelligence requires self-directed, continuous learning in novel environments.
Current AI progress isn't true, scalable intelligence but a 'brute force' effort. Amjad Masad contends models improve via massive, manual data labeling and contrived RL environments for specific tasks, a method he calls 'functional AGI,' not a fundamental crack in understanding intelligence.
A more likely AI future involves an ecosystem of specialized agents, each mastering a specific domain (e.g., physical vs. digital worlds), rather than a single, monolithic AGI that understands everything. These agents will require protocols to interact.
The pursuit of AGI is misguided. The real value of AI lies in creating reliable, interpretable, and scalable software systems that solve specific problems, much like traditional engineering. The goal should be "Artificial Programmable Intelligence" (API), not AGI.
Replit's CEO argues that today's LLMs are asymptoting on general reasoning tasks. Progress continues only in domains with binary outcomes, like coding, where synthetic data can be generated infinitely. This indicates a fundamental limitation of the current 'ingest the internet' approach for achieving AGI.