alt Hacker NewsI think "being able to do as well as a 50th percentile human who's had a little practice," on a wide range of tasks, is a pretty decent measure.
Yes, that's more versatile than most of us, because most of us are not at or above the median practiced person in a wide range of tasks. But it's not what I think of when I hear "superintelligence," because its performance on any given task is likely still inferior to the best humans.
Replies
Remember, that AI is a “jagged frontier.”
AI is already better than a 50th percentile human on many/most intellectual tasks. Chess, writing business plans, literature reviews, emails, motion graphics, coding…
So, if we say “AI is not AGI” because 1. It can’t do physical tasks or 2. it can’t replace intellectual human labor yet in most domains (for various reasons) or 3. <insert reason for not being AGI>, then it stands to reason that by the time we reach AGI, it will already be superintelligent (smarter than humans in most domains)
That seems like a personal definition for super intelligence. I don't think I'm alone in assuming super intelligence needs to be greater than all humans for it to be considered super vs "pretty good intelligence".