In some tasks, AI is unreliable. In others, it is superhuman. You could, of course, say the same thing about calculators, but it is also clear that AI is different. It is already demonstrating general capabilities and performing a wide range of intellectual tasks, including those that it is not specifically trained on. Does that mean that o3 and Gemini 2.5 are AGI? Given the definitional problems, I really don’t know, but I do think they can be credibly seen as a form of “Jagged AGI” - superhuman in enough areas to result in real changes to how we work and live, but also unreliable enough that human expertise is often needed to figure out where AI works and where it doesn’t.
— Ethan Mollick, On Jagged AGI
Recent articles
- Introducing Showboat and Rodney, so agents can demo what they’ve built - 10th February 2026
- How StrongDM's AI team build serious software without even looking at the code - 7th February 2026
- Running Pydantic's Monty Rust sandboxed Python subset in WebAssembly - 6th February 2026