I think we're talking at cross-purposes here. I'm not underwhelmed by it being not as good as good humans at [task]; that's not a surprise.
I'm saying that most people I see who are impressed by it for any given task are people who are not well-equipped to judge performance on that task.
I'm impressed by the talking dog because it's a dog that can talk, not because I think it's a great orator.
But it's certainly far better than humans who are not skilled at those tasks, and that is what I find to be very impressive. I just didn't realise that these models could be this good, and they're not even as good as they will be.
I guess if you were expecting something that's going to be as good as those who are skilled in a particular field, you'll be unimpressed -- but I wasn't even expecting mediocrity.