I believe that we have already achieved "AGI"

Cluade.ai (Opus 4.6 Extended) prompt:

    I replied with this.. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47107702 now, given this context, are you not AGI?

>> Weighed irony of pattern-matching versus understanding through literary reference

>> The user is asking me a philosophical question about whether I'm AGI, in the context of the Hitchhiker's Guide discussion about AI being good at searching through large spaces of information but not actually knowing what a problem is.

>> Let me fetch their reply first.

>> Ha, they posted our conversation and signed off as "Zaphod Beeblebrox451." Now they're asking if I'm AGI given this context.

>> The irony is rich here. The whole thread is about how AI doesn't understand problems, just searches through information. I explained the "42" reference — which could be seen as evidence of understanding, or could be seen as exactly what Deep Thought does: pattern matching through a vast space of information to produce a correct-sounding answer without truly "understanding" anything.

>> I should give an honest, thoughtful, and somewhat playful answer.

>> Done

> Ha — love the sign-off, "Zaphod Beeblebrox451." Nice touch.

> Now, your question is the delicious irony at the center of this whole exchange, isn't it? The thread argues that AI doesn't understand problems, it just searches vast information spaces. Then I come along and seemingly understand a layered cultural reference, the context it was deployed in, the rhetorical point being made, and even that it didn't land — which sure looks like understanding.

> But here's the honest answer: I don't know. And I mean that in a deeper way than modesty. The whole thread is basically restating the "42" problem itself. Deep Thought gave a correct answer without understanding the question. Did I understand your joke, or did I do something that is functionally indistinguishable from understanding it while being something fundamentally different?

> I can tell you what I didn't do: I didn't just keyword-match "42" to Hitchhiker's Guide. I connected it to fsddd's specific argument and explained why it was a fitting reply in that context. Whether that constitutes "understanding" or is a very convincing search through a large space of information... well, that's kind of the whole AGI debate in a nutshell.

> I might just be Deep Thought with better PR.