How many artists do you know who can produce almost any style of artwork with any subject matter within 15 seconds?
Stockfish is superintelligence in a very narrow domain. A superintelligent AGI is that concept applied to general intelligence. Whatever you try, it is always several steps ahead. If you ask it to write a program, and you think you found a bug, it’s not a bug, you just misunderstood the code. Anything that you can consider, it can also consider but in more depth.
More speculatively superintelligent AGI implies situations such as: you try to turn it off, but you find that it has already modified its own code, found a zero day and established an outpost on another network that you don’t have access to.
Ie, on chess.com I think stockfish times out on bullet games.
Some versions of stockfish can lose vs specific gambits, ie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5ul6b695Pw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtJeE0Th7rk
of course it is probably much less likely with more cpu times on current version of stockfish.
I think it's important to note the distinction between "it can also consider" and "it did also consider". Super Intelligence is not the same as Infinite Intelligence, there are still physical limitations and time components that can still get in the way.
It would be helpful to be able to quantify the speed of intelligence, and the idea surface area of a task with these systems. Meaning, how fast can the AI reason, and how many ideas are there to think about connected to a given task, and how much thinking is required for those ideas.
A “mistake” to stockfish looks like: I searched 30 ply down but my opponent searched 35 ply down and found a superior sequence of moves.
For stockfish to make the kinds of chess mistakes that humans make, it would similar to if I failed to calculate 123+123=246. It’s not that 123+123 is particularly easy on the grand scale of intelligence: animals cannot do it. But it’s completely inconceivable that I could make that kind of mistake.
I see bastions falling like sand castles recently.
You can fire up GPT, not issue a command, and it'll just idle there until the hardware fails.
Granted that's also the one thing I hope we don't "solve" for.
A cognitive entity does not have to best you at all things. There are standardized education tests it may never reach above 10th percentile on, just as humans will never reach above 10th percentile in the short term memory tasks that apes are masters of. But we are the 100th percentile for tasks like industrialized destruction of them and their habitats and capturing and using them for painful medical experiments - the apes are wholly outclassed when it comes to that.
I don't think there's much public info available on it, but Facebook built an AI that plays very competitively in a strategy game built on negotiation and manipulation.
It's still pretty cool, but its not like it just convinced people using raw charisma. Yet.
On a serious note, thanks for the analysis, as someone who knows next to nothing about competitive diplomacy.