I wish the negative comments were right, but from these models it’s clear that the next step in evolution, AGI is something many of us will experience at some time in the future.
I would stop that kind of evolution, as it can be catastrophic, but I know that humanity is not able to stop itself from evolving further.
I don’t think anyone had demonstrated AGI is a foregone conclusion. I’m not sure it is possible with a Turing machine. We do not think in any manner like a Turing machine or any computer ever conceived. If we do, no one has provided any evidence of such a claim. Humans can make complex insights with hardly any training and on very few calories.
How do you figure regarding hardly any training? Humans are constantly training on a never ending stream of sensory information from the time their brains form in the womb, not to mention whatever subconscious and conscious processes are reconciling that data with memory, or whatever training has been built into our minds over eons of evolution.
An 18 year old will have been training for ~160,000 hours on a volume of raw data that is probably far beyond our ability to currently store let alone train an AI with.
As far as training for a specific task, all that training on other matters kicks in to help the human learn or accomplish a “novel” task more rapidly, for example, knowing how to read and interpret the instructions for that task, knowing how to move your appendages and the expected consequences of your physical interactions with a material object. You’re certainly not taking a fetus with a blank slate and getting it to accomplish much at all.
It absolutely is hardly any training for the types of problems humans have solved. Ramanujan did not need to consume the entire corpus of mathematics or even had much formal education whatsoever. He did so, again, on very few calories compared to pre-trained AI models. I am not claiming learning how to pick up a rock does not help you in any way to understand continued fractions but it is pretty unreasonably to compare an AI as has been demonstrated as being anywhere near the same sort of thing.
Sure, we can go with the other option that humans will stay the most intelligent species on Earth until the solar system dies, history just shows that it's quite improbable.
Where does history show that? Are you serious? Humans are an outlier on Earth for which there is no other that has anywhere remotely the same level of intelligence. You may think that is aggrandizing humans but it is categorically true. You would need to provide sone world up-ending evidence to prove the contrary.
If you are also saying AIs will be a more intelligent species, able to adapt better on Earth than humans, that requires extraordinary evidence. A human could solve complex problems no other species it machine can solve on nothing more than a handful of rice for a week. Where is the similar scale species/machine?
I would stop that kind of evolution, as it can be catastrophic, but I know that humanity is not able to stop itself from evolving further.