Today's AI models have surpassed the definition of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) that was commonly accepted by AI researchers just over a decade ago. The debate continues because the goalposts for what constitutes "true" AGI have been moved.

The industry promotes

OpenAI now publicly labels its Astra model as AGI, a significant communications shift. This is enabled by a revised Microsoft agreement and a broader industry re-focus. The new existential threat is 'super intelligence,' making the AGI label a less controversial and more viable marketing term.

Naming AI research teams with terms like "AGI" is more about signaling a long-term "north star" and creating "vibes" to attract ambitious talent, rather than reflecting a concrete, step-by-step plan to achieve artificial general intelligence.

Even as AI models surpass technical AGI benchmarks, the host argues people will keep moving the goalposts. The true, socially accepted definition of AGI will be its "feel"—its ability to generalize and execute complex, nuanced tasks with minimal instruction, like a human.

AI companies exploit the lack of a scientific consensus on 'AGI' (Artificial General Intelligence) by defining it differently to suit their audience—as a cure-all for regulators, a helpful assistant for consumers, or a revenue machine for investors.

Dr. Li views the distinction between AI and AGI as largely semantic and market-driven, rather than a clear scientific threshold. The original goal of AI research, dating back to Turing, was to create machines that can think and act like humans. The term "AGI" doesn't fundamentally change this North Star for scientists.

Sequoia highlights the "AI effect": once an AI capability becomes mainstream, we stop calling it AI and give it a specific name, thereby moving the goalposts for "true" AI. This historical pattern of downplaying achievements is a key reason they are explicitly declaring the arrival of AGI.

Dan Siroker argues AGI has already been achieved, but we're reluctant to admit it. He claims major AI labs have 'perverse incentives' to keep moving the goalposts, such as avoiding contractual triggers (like OpenAI with Microsoft) or to continue the lucrative AI funding race.