I think this article misses the main point that AI is where it is not because people fought back against it, but because the grifters making it needed to provide incentives such that they could foot their $1 trillion bills.

As I've learned today: confidence is more influential than actual facts. So Altman has confidently grifted his way into a place where he might find a way to foot the bills, even if that way is just government bailout - clever, but hardly the fault of people saying "putting AI in charge is a bad idea".

And yes, we're nowhere near AGI, and, personally, I don't think our current trajectory leads there. Something fundamental has to change to reach that point. LLMs might be tools that an AGI uses, but in the same way that I am not a car (it's a tool I use, and it cannot work alone - it requires some intelligent direction), an AGI would not be a token-predictor. There's more to it than that, as easily evidenced by the hit/miss rate.

I'm not saying "don't use the tools". I'm saying "don't _trust_ the tools" - because they are probablistic, not deterministic. They have no actual understanding. They can string tokens together well enough to fool humans into feeling like there's a person at the other end (and some people are fooled enough to believe AGI is in the making).