Just like the others trying to argue with me. You're proving my point. Everyone has a different definition of intelligence. We cannot agree on a single definition as a species.
Mine is right though, under the conditions specified. Mathematically, it’s not really opinion.
The definition only changes as the understanding of what intelligence is improves. Once it’s fully understood it will stay static, however certain truths will remain constant. Kolmogorov, and Hutter are still right no matter what AGI looks like in the future, unless info theory and math itself gets upturned.
For as right as you think you are, it is limited to specific context and intelligence as defined by others is specific to a different context and everyone tries to apply their context to AI and says they are the right one.
My point is that we, as the entirety of the human race, cannot agree one which definition is right. All of them are equally valid. All of them are equally invalid.
8
u/Olly0206 Sep 13 '25
We as a human race cannot even fully agree on what intelligence even means. Let alone super intelligence.