Just comes down to your own view of what AGI is, as it's not particularly well defined.

While a bit 'time-machiney' - I think if you took an LLM of today and showed it to someone 20 years ago, most people would probably say AGI has been achieved. If someone wrote a definition of AGI 20 years ago, we would probably have met that.

We have certainly blasted past some science-fiction examples of AI like Agnes from The Twilight Zone, which 20 years ago looked a bit silly, and now looks like a remarkable prediction of LLMs.

By todays definition of AGI we haven't met it yet, but eventually it comes down to 'I know it if I see it' - the problem with this definition is that it is polluted by what people have already seen.

I want to know what the "intelligence explosion" is, sounds much cooler than AGI.

I have noticed that Claude users seem to be about as intelligent as Claude itself, and wouldn't be able to surpass its output.