If something has general intelligence it should be able to read the rules of a game and follow them. Therefore an artificial general intelligence (AGI) should be able to do this.

So we have a situation where very powerful and influential people are saying we will have AGI in 6 months (if we don’t already), yet the facts on the ground are so clearly pointing in the opposite direction.

> Why should that matter?

Because we want to use this as a replacement for humans, and the average human can learn the rules of chess without needing to see the rules explained hundreds of thousands of times in millions of games.

So, yeah, it matters if a model has millions of examples of something in its training set and still cannot follow the rules.