LLMs alone won't. Experts in the field seem to have different opinions on if they will help get us there. What is concerning to me is that the issues and dangers of AGI also exist with advanced LLM models, and that research is being shelved because it gets in the way of profit. Maybe we'll never be able to get to AGI, but we sure better hope if we do we get it right the first time. How's that been going with the more primitive LLMs?

Do we even know what the "right" AGI would be? We're treading in dangerous waters.

Corollary: anyone who thinks LLMs will give us AGI - regardless of academic or professional experience and expertise - either doesn’t understand how LLMs work, or is intentionally lying.

I haven't assumed that those who believe AGI will, at some point, come to be necessarily think that LLMs is exactly the tech which will get us there. Just that AGI is likely to happen because they don't think there's anything super special about the meat in our heads that makes intelligence possible and it should be able to be reproduced in other mediums.

I've been using DuckDuckGo's AI Chat relatively a lot lately and it has always worked for me. Well, with one exception, I was able to break it accidentally by including a specific special character in the input, which then it tried to respond with, and then it failed to load the response. Luckily I was about to tell it to refer to that character in a different way. I don't remember which character was it, but not a punctuation mark, not something rare I copied from somewhere. Maybe one that's often displayed with an empty rectangle in UTF-8.

I like that anything I do there is not tied to an account, but not even to an IP address or anything like that, assuming that I trust DDG with it, because it acts as a proxy. Sure, it doesn't have the latest version of ChatGPT and Claude, but I don't need cutting edge tech either, they work fine enough, and this added privacy is more important to me.