> I see this comment often and am confused why we wouldn't want to "move the goalposts". I'd rather call it "passing a milestone" or simply "progress".

You're literally moving the "moving the goalposts" goalpost to make it more palatable.

> More specifically it just means most criteria, especially the Turing test, are poorly defined.

Nonsense. The Turing test was widely accepted for the specific reason that it contained a concrete method of testing for Artificial Intelligence. Go look for a better-defined goalpost for intelligence. You'll find pile after steaming pile of meaningless philosophical hair-splitting, each so completely divorced from reality as to make it useless as a real-world measuring stick.

Turing's test was and is the best measure of 'intelligence'. LLMs have passed the test. They are intelligent. Narrowly so, and utterly without agency, but they're clearly intelligent. There's no need to move the goalposts so that we can feel better about our place in the universe.

I actually agree that Turing's 1950 definition is pretty vague in places and there are a few different interpretations out there. As we discuss in the paper, it's also unclear what should constitute a pass in terms statistical analysis.