I always found arguments for or against such technological advancements meaningless, if we don't specify what timeframes we are talking about. Sometimes I have the impression that people who disagree are simply thinking in different timeframes. For me, only short- and sometimes mid-term timeframes are practical in such deabtes. Long-term is interesting, but more in the realm of science fiction.

In the context of AGI, is it inevitable eventually? Sure, I would agree, unless some catastrophic event puts back our technological advancement.

IMO, don't see the path to AGI with the current tech, though. All current SOTA agents are still LLM based with all their flaws (limited reasoning, generalization, incomplete world model, hallucinations, ...). At their core, they are still next token predictors with a limited context.

Most of the advances in AI in the past 2 years are in post-training and harnesses.

I'd expect a different core technology than just an LLM in order to get to AGI.

About as 'inevitable' as fusion power, virtual reality and flying cars I'd say. The actual technological revolutions are usually less 'obvious'.

Well, if progress stops it can be avoided..

AGI isn't necessary to completely change things. The change that's occurred in the last 6 months alone is massive. Another couple of big steps like the end of last year and the world is unrecognisable from even a few years ago.

Give your arguments for it not being inevitable if you question it.