That was a lot of words to say that you really don't. I guess we are just supposed to overlook the fact that you tried to say you know OpenAI is lying about achieving AGI by never actually claiming that they achieved AGI.

You know this how?

Here is the problem you are facing making this claim. Slashdot has throughout the course of AI history consistently been populated by a certain contingent of the "AI is not real / AI Can't do / AI will never be able to do ..." types like yourself, and history as proved them wrong ... every ... single ... time. Conflating Sam Altman with Open AI is arguing from a position of false equivalence, and even if it was not it was Greg Brockman, not Altman, that authored the release.

What are you going on about? It is *far* more common for laypersons to use the phrase "Ask GPT" than "Ask Claude", and most of the people I know say "Ask AI", a trend that will continue when AI transitions from AI to AGI. There is no reasonable reason to suspect that people will abandon contemporary terminology in favor of more accurate terminology. Most people aren't going to ask the question "wait ... did you ask AI or AGI?" You grossly overestimate the human propensity to be specific and accurate.

To extend your metaphor, the USA is a huge boat with a very large number of people who are already not good at swimming. Some kind of flotation device may be the only hope they have. To show where your metaphor breaks down, no matter how well you understand them or how you use them, Water Wings can't help you learn to swim and/or become a better swimmer. AI isn't automatically a destructive force. It is the use of AI by people who don't understand it and haven't learned to use it in the right way for the right purpose(s) that causes the problem. This parallels the internet. The problem isn't that people have access to the internet. The problem is that most people don't understand it and/or use it properly, so they think anti-social media is great, and if they saw it on the internet it must be true, or they intentionally abuse it in furtherance of their own bad actor agenda.

I already apologized for making the mistake of thinking you might not be a complete idiot. Following up with a post to prove that you are one was a completely superfluous act. Off you go now ...

I apologize for thinking you are finally starting to get a clue. As usual you continue to make absurd and unsubstantiated claims based on a lack of understanding of the subject matter. AI is much better at *finding* *vulnerabilities*, and that is the issue. How hard it is to code an exploit is a secondary issue, though of course frontier models are more than capable of doing that as well. They also reason and work as a team to achieve goals. You might try watching the OpenAI Black Hat 2026 presentation on the hugging face incident so that you don't perpetuate this bizarre habit you have of making absurd and easily discounted claims.

It's good to see you make the transition from "LLMs are just word predictors" to "they present a serious problem that will require software engineers" (Quoted text is paraphrasing.) Unfortunately, just as video killed the radio star, Agile killed the software engineer.

You have to have literally no idea what is going on in the AI domain in order to make such an absurd statement. The hugging face incident is just one of a plethora of data points that your claim, oft parroted by people like yourself who have no experience with AI and no real knowledge or understanding of it, continue to parrot like a 1st generation LLM, is stupid, ridiculous, and uninformed.

It is ironic that you are calling someone an idiot while concurrently demonstrating your lack of understanding between "this" and "that", but it turns out that your comment was accidentally correct.

So your comment that "I made your point" was supposed to be interpreted as "You successfully countered my point ... Ha Ha"? I wish you knew the definition of sarcasm.

I'm not sure if you are being intentionally disengenuos by omitting the fact that Claude Code is not the source code for Claude, but either way you're pay is stupid. The good news is that you can, with your far superior serious knowledge and skills, spin up a major player in the AI space yourself and get rich in no time. g00d 1uck!

Simple minds think that understanding something implies support, and the fact that you think smart people don't get taken in by cults shows that you know as much about cults as you do about AI.

I made your point by showing that you're a clueless idiot? Why would you be trying to make a point of telling everyone you are a clueless idiot ... twice now, no less?

The major difference between AIs and you is that AIs actually know what they are talking about.