Summary of the Core Content
This article thoroughly analyzes the unusual situation where OpenAI recently declared “Welcome to the AGI era” but refused to officially acknowledge that GPT-6 represents AGI. Essentially, AGI has never been a clearly defined, purely technical concept from its inception. It was originally coined by the research community to distinguish it from “weak AI” that could only perform single tasks. Later, it became a “termination clause” in the multi-billion-dollar partnership between OpenAI and Microsoft: once AGI was officially achieved, all of Microsoft’s exclusive commercial licenses would automatically become invalid, and the technology would be made available to the entire human population. However, in 2026, both parties removed this clause, turning AGI from a legally binding contractual term into a “moral mission” as stated by OpenAI.
GPT-6 (also known as Astra) has indeed made a significant leap in capabilities. It can independently complete tasks across five different fields, solve long-unresolved mathematical problems, and even create its own shorthand symbols while playing unfamiliar games, far surpassing the capabilities of early chatbots. Yet, the entire industry still lacks a consensus on what AGI actually means. The evaluation criteria used by different teams vary greatly, with scores fluctuating by up to 37% depending on the testing environment. The fact that there is so much debate about AGI indicates that it has not yet arrived. If it did, no one would need to hold a press conference to argue about whether it qualifies as AGI.
---
Simplified Explanation of Key Points
1. AGI was never defined with a clear goal in mind; rather, a term was created first, and then various requirements were fitted into it
Many people think of AGI as the “ultimate form of artificial intelligence” that scientists have long described in their papers, and we are working towards that goal. However, this is completely backwards. When the term “artificial intelligence” was first coined in 1956, the intention was to create a general-purpose intelligence similar to humans. Over time, the term has been overused, leading to its misuse in various contexts. Researchers who wanted to develop machines capable of doing everything like humans finally came up with the term AGI in 2001 to justify their ambitions. More dramatically, AGI later became a crucial clause in a multi-billion-dollar contract between OpenAI and Microsoft, specifying that once AGI was achieved, all of Microsoft’s exclusive licenses would be revoked, ensuring that the technology would not be monopolized by capital. This clause was later removed, and AGI has transformed from a legally binding term to a mere corporate slogan.
2. GPT-6’s progress is truly remarkable; it has surpassed all previous limitations of AI
While some may think OpenAI is just marketing, GPT-6’s capabilities are genuine and represent a significant leap forward. Previous AI systems were specialized tools that could perform specific tasks, but GPT-6 can independently create complete products across multiple fields. It can also solve complex mathematical problems and develop its own shorthand systems while playing games. This represents a significant advancement in AI technology.
3. Why isn’t GPT-6 recognized as AGI? The reason is that there is no consensus on the definition of AGI
The four main AI players in the industry have completely different standards for what constitutes AGI:
- OpenAI’s standard is practical: If a system can perform most valuable human tasks, it is considered AGI.
- Chollet from Keras believes that AGI should be able to quickly learn new things without relying on memorized knowledge.
- DeepMind’s standard focuses on measuring cognitive abilities in areas such as perception, reasoning, and social interaction.
- The domestic Zhispu standard requires the creation of original knowledge at a theoretical level.
The lack of a unified definition means that even scoring systems are unreliable. The same GPT-6 may score 62.7% on a neutral test and 99.9% using OpenAI’s own testing interface, showing a 37% difference. This inconsistency indicates that AGI has not yet been truly realized.
4. The most relevant change for ordinary people is the shift in responsibility
The widespread fear that AI will replace jobs is misplaced. In reality, companies are not laying off employees due to AI; instead, AI is taking over routine tasks that used to be done by new hires. However, this shift also means that the burden of responsibility for AI’s actions falls on humans. For example, an AI system that manages a store without supervision may cause losses, and the person who implemented it will be held accountable for the consequences. This is the real impact of AI on everyday life, not the dystopian scenario often depicted in science fiction.
In summary, the debate over whether GPT-6 represents AGI shows that we are still far from that reality. When AGI does arrive, there will be no need for such debates.