The question was about their redefinition of AGI in economical terms for which others provided links, not the one from their (obviously fake) mission statement.

BTW I didn't downwote you (I hate it, if many people downvote a comment it's harder to read), I was just trying to explain why others did. On second thought, my comment was wrong, because your answer was related to the question but it wasn't really the intended one.

> They redefined AGI to be an economical thing Huh. Source?

I don't think your original comment deserve to be downvoted. (Calling someone illiterate, on the other hand.)

But the "it" I was asking about was "AGI" as "an economical thing." You technically correctly answered how OpenAI defines AGI in public, i.e. with no reference to profits. But it did not address the economic definition OP initially alluded to.

For what it's worth, I could have been clearer in my ask.