Eric Schmidt

If you didn't write it, then it must have been your twin.

But in any case, you got the emphasis right, which was that investment in research, investment in the kind of stuff that we do is really, really important.

I don't agree with you on this AGI thing because there's this group which I call the San Francisco narrative, because they all live in San Francisco, and their narrative goes something like this.

Today we're doing agents.

The agentic revolution will change businesses, which I agree with.

that what happens is the systems will become recursively self-intelligent.

With recursive self-improvement, as it's called, if you have a scale-free problem, and a scale-free problem, for example, is programming or math, where you can just keep doing it, you get these enormous fast gains if you buy enough hardware, do enough software, so forth and so on.

That is still underway.

The collective of that says that in the next three-ish years, they believe that we will get forms of superintelligence.

And the way they define it is basically a savant, a chemist savant, a physics savant, a mathematician savant.

I don't agree with the three years, but I do agree that it'll be maybe six or seven years.

It's not general intelligence yet.

General intelligence is when it can set its own objective function.

Right.

There's no evidence right now of the ability to set your own objective function.

The thinking, and I'm writing a paper on this, so I've been studying it, is that the technical problem is non-stationarity of mathematical proofs.

And what you're doing is you're trying to solve against the objective function, but the objective function keeps changing, which is how humans operate.

Your goal changes every day, whereas computers have trouble with that.

As a math problem, we don't have an algorithm yet for LLMs that can do that.

People are working on it.