I disagree. There is some argument to be had that they're already generally intelligent. They're already certainly better than me in basically anything I can ask them to do.

So that leads to the question of what qualifies as intelligent? And do we need sentience for intelligence? What about self-agency/-actuation? Is that needed for "generally intelligent"?

I don't know.

But I feel like we're not there yet, even for non-sentient intelligence. I personally think we need an "unlimited" context (as good as human memory context windows anyway, which some argue we've already surpassed) and genuine self-learning before we get close. I don't think we need it to be an infallible genius (i.e ASI) to qualify as generally intelligent ... or to put it another way "about as smart and reliable as the average human adult" which frankly is quite a low bar!

One thing for sure though, I think this will creep up on us and one day it will suddenly become apparent that it's already there and we just didn't appreciate/notice/comprehend. There won't be a big fireworks display the moment it happens, more of a creeping realisation I think.

I give it 5 years +/-2.