BBC seems to consistently use "X, formerly known as Twitter" throughout their publishing.

I think this is similar to what t-3 said, but I think to me, the gap between the very impressive current generation of AI and what would seem more like AGI to me is agency.

Right now, these systems all seem to be entirely doing things that are downstream of what some human has determined is worth doing.

People are using ChatGPT to help them write an engaging article on the trade offs between nuclear and solar energy. But, to my knowledge, there is no artificial intelligence out there looking around, deciding that the this is an interesting topic for an article, writing it, publishing it somewhere, and then following up on that with other interesting articles based on the conversation generated by that one.

I don't mean this specific thing of writing articles is an important indicator. I mean coming up with ideas and then executing them, independently.

Now, it may well be that our current technologies could do this, but that we just aren't setting them up to do so. I dunno!

But I think this is the thing that would make me change my mind if I started to see it.

The trick is that Google actually works great. It works better than before. It just doesn't work in the way that we (highly educated and technical people) want. We all laughed at our parents and grandparents for typing full sentence questions into the search bar in 2005 instead of carefully crafted incantations with keywords, "site:" labels and other such things. Young people often use full sentences today because that is what works.

The google we grew up with was a tool that allowed you to precisely retrieve authoritative writings related to a subject, but today's google is a lot more like ChatGPT than that.