We regret to inform you that Ray Kurzweil is back on his bullshit
We regret to inform you that Ray Kurzweil is back on his bullshit
The Google futurist talks nanobots and avatars, deepfakes and elections – and why he is so optimistic about a future where we merge with computers
You're viewing part of a thread.
It wasn't an evaluation. The reporter quoted without any investigation.
The reporter said in effect, "Kurzweil said it so it must be true."
That's no different than saying Terryology is true because Terrance Howard said it's true.
It's entirely different in that terryology isn't based on anything and kurzweil based his predictions on tech development like wearable and practical exoskeletal manufacturing that came true.
I can see how the truth and false of it all confuses you, but really.
Read. At all.
Think critically for yourself, don't just take the word of and paraphrase what the other comments said before you.
It's embarrassing to respond to your myopic earnestness.
Still kind of fun though.
You've made several mistakes.
The first quote isn't responding to me as far as I can tell, and the following three already had answers from me when you wrote this.
Maybe you were compiling these for a long time?
Blakestacey replied to you with a long list of fails that rolled into 2 posts that you didn't reply to.
Another you only said something like you took too long, I'm not replying.
Ah, I didn't get that on my end.
I'm sure it was...as reasoned and sturdy as the rest of these rebuttals have been.
Post the links to the replies you claim to have made. Lemmy.world still shows nothing.
You couuuuld learn to scroll instead
You made the claim you already replied to everyone. You provide the proof.
Everyone else accepted the prior proof, your the only one still pretending not to understand and making up stories to avoid the report that you were incorrect.
Kurzweil was accurate in most of his predictions.
Thanks for helping prove that
The Terryology is a commentary on the scientific method and your support of Kurzweil despite the lack of any external verification.
Kurzweil evaluated himself.
That's not how it works.
Here is every prediction he made that would exist by 2009:
Personal computers are available in a wide range of sizes and shapes, and are commonly embedded in clothing and jewelry such as wristwatches, rings, earrings and other body ornaments".[20]
Fail. Watch wasn't until a few years later. Still not commonly embedded in clothing and jewelry.
The majority of reading is done on displays rather than paper, though paper documents (including print books) are still common.[21]
Fail. Ebooks just started in 2010 with less than 10% of the market. Office work had been done on computers since the 1980's. Smartphone like the iPhone capable of allowing reading on a computer were not the majority of the market in 2009.
Most text will be created using speech recognition technology.[20]
Fail. Wasn't in 2009. Still not in 2024.
Intelligent roads and driverless cars are in use, mostly on highways. Local roads still require full human interaction.
Fail.
People use personal computers the size of rings, pins, credit cards and books.
Fail. Smartphone use was just starting. If we give him partial credit, it's 1/4 because rings, pins and credit card computers still aren't common.
Most portable computers do not have moving parts or keyboards.
Fail. iPhones had physical buttons in 2009. Android phones had full keyboards in 2009. Laptops still have keyboards.
Though desktop PCs are still common for data storage, individuals primarily use portable devices for their computer-related tasks.[22][20]Again fail unless you give him a few years handicap for smartphone revolution.
Personal worn computers provide monitoring of body functions, automated identity and directions for navigation.
Again fail unless you give him a few years handicap for smartphone revolution.
Many devices offer high-speed network access via wireless technology. Which was an accurate prediction.[23][20]Ok
"Most routine business transactions (purchases, travel, reservations) take place between a human and a virtual personality. Often, the virtual presentation includes an animated visual presence that looks like a human face."[24]
Fail
Digital products such as books, songs, games, movies and software are typically acquired as files via a wireless network and have no physical object associated with them.[23]
Fail. While it was taking off, it wasn't typical in 2009.
Cables are disappearing. Computer peripherals use wireless communication.[20][24]
Ok
People can talk to their computer to give commands.
Fail.
Computer displays built into eyeglasses for augmented reality are used.[20]
Fail.
Computers can recognize their owner's face from a picture or video.
Fail (2009)
Three-dimensional chips are commonly used.
Fail.
Sound-producing speakers are being replaced with very small chip-based devices that can place high-resolution sound anywhere in three-dimensional space.
Fail (2009)
A $1,000 computer can perform a trillion calculations per second.
Fail
Supercomputers have been built that can operate at 20 petaflops (roughly the hardware-equivalent of the human brain according to Kurzweil).
Fail
Here is every prediction for 2009:
Consumer-level computers across the world can network together to form decentralized supercomputers, many of which have the computational capacity of the human brain.
Not a prediction because GIMPS came out in 1996 and Seti@home was 1999. Nor did any have the capacity of a human brain by 2009.
There is increasing interest in massively parallel neural nets, genetic algorithms, and other forms of "chaotic" or complexity theory computing.That's not a prediction. There were standard CS classes on those topics in the 1980's.
Research has been initiated on reverse engineering the brain through both destructive and non-invasive scans.
Fail.
Autonomous nano-engineered machines have been demonstrated and include their own computational controls.
Fail
Digital documents routinely display moving images and sounds.
Ok.
Artificial voices sound fully human.Fail (2009)
Phones can translate spoken sentences to different languages and read them back aloud.[25][24]Fail
Telephone communication is mostly wireless.
Not a prediction. Cell phones were already common in 1999. (283 million sold in the US in 1999.)
Cell phones display high-resolution images. Users can engage in audio-video teleconferences.
Ok
High-resolution audio-visual cybersex is common, aided by falling costs of high-speed internet and computer hardware.Megabit internet still wasn't common in 2009.
At least 50% of all transactions are conducted over the internet.
Ok
Personal artificial digital assistants are in widespread use. They can understand spoken language, look up answers to questions, set appointments, conduct transactions, tell jokes, and more.
Fail
An increasing share of the population is working from home and while traveling.
Fail. It took COVID for that to be forced.
The typical home has over 100 computers in it, many of which are embedded in appliances.[26]
Fail. Adding every appliance and computer in a 2009 house wasn't close to 100.
Though not yet ubiquitous, many households have one or more robots that perform some type of housekeeping.
Ok.
People often play music alongside digital musicians. (In "How My Predictions Are Faring" written in 2010, and "Ray Kurzweil Defends His 2009 Predictions" written in 2012[27] Kurzweil cited Guitar Hero and Apple's Magic GarageBand Jam as two examples.) [24]
Ok, but "often?"
Audio-visual virtual reality has entered the mass market. Users can digitally tour real locations or play in highly immersive fantasy worlds. Tactile (haptic) VR technology is still primitive however
Fail
Militaries rely heavily on armed unmanned airborne devices.
Fail
"Bioengineered treatments for cancer and heart disease have greatly reduced the mortality from these diseases." ("Stem cell transplants, including peripheral blood, bone marrow, and cord blood transplants, can be used to treat cancer.")[28] (Wayback Machine)[24]Fail. While that tech was being developed, it didn't "greatly reduce mortality" and still doesn't.
Telemedicine is common. Devices monitor and relay health-related data of many patients and send that information to doctors remotely. Teleconferencing between doctor and patient is also popular.
Fail. Again that started with COVID.
Computers and medical software are capable enough at image and pattern recognition that they are routinely used to help diagnose diseases by analyzing scans of patients.
Fail
Doctors and medical students often train in virtual reality environments, which include haptic feedback and simulated patients.
Fail. (2009 it was experimental and still experimental today)
"The neo-Luddite movement is growing."[24]
???
"Accelerating returns from the advance of computer technology have resulted in continued economic expansion." ("U.S. real gross domestic product (real GDP shown in constant 2005 dollars) grew every year except for a small decline in 2009. It grew by 21 percent in constant dollars over the decade." -Kurzweil[27])[24]The stock market grew in the 1910's, 1920's, 1940's, 50's, 60's, 80's and 90's. That's not a prediction when the reason given is wrong. (The stock market grew before silicon scaling existed and computer performance stopped accelerating because of Moore's law ending.)
7 out of 41 were correct. 20% accuracy. If we give partial credit for smartphones even though his dates were off by a few years it goes up to 25%.
TLDR: you are apparently unaware that popular consumer smartphones like the Blackberry go back to 2002 and personal PCs like the Palm Pilot to the 90s.
That said, these attempts are better!
Many points you’ve written are not correct or based on incomplete information, but I appreciate the effort you made to take a clear stand with solid allegations.
It looks like you're ignoring the other hundred correct predictions and just want focus on the ones with one specific year, 2009, to more easily “debunk”.
Goalposts dramatically shifted, but I like the game, so let's do it.
- Personal computers are available in a wide range of sizes and shapes, and are commonly embedded in clothing and jewelry such as wristwatches, rings, earrings and other body ornaments".[20]
You must be talking about the Apple watch, which was not the first wearable personal computer.
People had news headlines, weather, stock tickers, step counting and heart rate monitor watches in the 2000s.
Microsoft spot watch(2000)
Just a check...yea, 2000 was before 2009.
Also, the blackberry came out in 2002.
So that's a pass...cool.
- The majority of reading is done on displays rather than paper, though paper documents (including print books) are still common.[21]
I see here you are pretending that only print books and e-book readers exist, rather than acknowledging the act of reading on a computer screen(forums, reviews, online news).
Or maybe you forgot about computers.
Paaass.
- Intelligent roads and driverless cars are in use, mostly on highways. Local roads still require full human interaction.
Intelligent roads, of course, sensors, traffic/accident/emergency warnings, but driverless cars, uh-uh. That’s a partial fail! Local roads still did require full human interaction. I’ll take a half point. But you can have it if you don’t like it. You’ll see I don’t need it later on.
- > People use personal computers the size of rings, pins, credit cards and books.
Obviously a pass, we had palm pilots in 1996, tens of millions of them and other derivations in just a few years, before even 2000. There were tons of tiny PCs in many shapes and sizes. Pocket PCs were popular and varied.
5.> Most portable computers do not have moving parts or keyboards.
Most portable computers did not have keyboards. Laptops okay, but truly portable PCS like palm pilots generally used a handwriting input system or stylus or the like.
Are you pretty young? This stuff was pretty popular.
Pass
6.> Though desktop PCs are still common for data storage, individuals primarily use portable devices for their computer-related tasks.[22][20]
Maybe I’m missing your point here. I can’t statistically prove this one any more than you have, but people already used their phones constantly before 2010, much more than people used PCs.
I think you’re conflating iphones with smartphones again.
Pass
7. > Personal worn computers provide monitoring of body functions, automated identity and directions for navigation.
As mentioned earlier, there were various devices that were step counters and monitored functions like heart rate. Not ubiquitous, but they were developed well before your specific cutoff date.
The Timex Datalink came out in 1994 and monitored steps, calories, as well as calendars, phone directory, that kind of stuff
Various straps measured heart rate like the Nike Sportband from 2006.
So pass
Okay! I think we’ve already matched your total number of correct predictions real quick simply by looking outside of Apple’s corporate history.
We’ve already corrected your errors or ignorance of certain earlier consumer products. Idk, should we do more?
Let’s double it, it’s obvious you just didn’t know about consumer tech products outside of the Apple bubble
- > Personal worn computers provide monitoring of body functions, automated identity and directions for navigation.
GPS was very popular even before Apple, I’m not going to link to Garmin or Magellan or whatever. If you’re curious, you can read any history of modern consumer GPS devices, they start back in the early 90s.
Pass.
9.> Many devices offer high-speed network access via wireless technology. Which was an accurate prediction.[23][20]
You passed this one, which, yea, that would be tricky even only knowing Apple history to refute.
10. > "Most routine business transactions (purchases, travel, reservations) take place between a human and a virtual personality. Often, the virtual presentation includes an animated visual presence that looks like a human face."[24]
Hey a fail! Good for you. 85% correct(one partial) and one fail!
Well, wait. Actually, most routine business transactions did have virtual personalities(excited thank yous for purchases, suggestions to do this or that, but still! There were very few faces! Okay, well, that’s a quick bump to 90% correct predictions so far from the first ten points.
11. > Digital products such as books, songs, games, movies and software are typically acquired as files via a wireless network and have no physical object associated with them.[23]
Do you mean digital products derived from physical media or actual digital products? Because digital products not derived from physical products were common by 2009. Hm.
I’ll give you a half point, why not?
12. > Cables are disappearing. Computer peripherals use wireless communication.[20][24]
Doy.
Pass
13. > People can talk to their computer to give commands.
This was possible I don’t even know how long ago via accessibility on every copy of Windows. I went through a phase talking to my computer via the grid square thing. It was cool.
And very real.
Pass
- > Computer displays built into eyeglasses for augmented reality are used.[20]
Okay, you really didn’t even look any of these up, AR glasses are old. They still weren’t cool, but they have been around a long time. Heck, that’s how they trained the astronauts in the 2000s.
Pass
You incorrectly claimed that “7 out of 41 were correct.”
Instead, we’ve found 11 correct and 3 portially correct in the first 14 items on your list.
So that’s 90% correct predictions.
You weren’t even close.
It seems like you are very unaware of fairly common technology before 2009.
But just because you didn’t know about it doesn’t mean it didn’t exist.
Shoot, you should look up the Blackberry. It was a revolutionary smartphone from 2002. It was basically apple before apple, you’d like it.
Re: people can talk to their computer to give commands
His claim was that it would be typical, not that it was possible. If you use your definition, it's a fail because Dragon Dictate was out in 1997. My Philips Nino from 1998 had voice recognition.
Claiming already existing technology will be invented in the future isn't a prediction. Voice input still isn't the dominant method of data input today.
So I was going off of your claim, you wrote " people can talk to their computer to give commands".
The modern version where you can do that was developed in the 2000s, so ..
Paaasss
Dragon Dictate and voice commands in the Philips Nino were from 1997 and 1998 respectively.
Fail.
Not to control everything on the computer like in the 2k.
Paass
Dragon Dictate 1997 allowed voice dictation and complete control with voice commands.
TLDR: you are apparently unaware that popular consumer smartphones like the Blackberry go back to 2002 and personal PCs like the Palm Pilot to the 90s.
Do you have a reading or memory problem? I referenced Palm with cell data as the reason it's not a prediction in my first replies. Predicting a product that's already for sale isn't a prediction.
It's also the specific predictions like of no mechanical interface that Kurzweil had for those devices which was wrong until the iPhone became popular and dropped the physical buttons. Which I carefully wrote but you didn't read.
Finally, as I already said in my conclusion, even if you give Kurzweil a handicap of of 5 yrars, that only raises his percentage to 25%,.
Read what I wrote.
Hey, of your want those happy points, take em.
So we're down to, what? 85% correct on the first chubby baker's dozen (that's 14. Cause he's chubby)?
I'm fine with 85% correct predictions, that seems correct and is way more concrete teeth the point I was making before, that he was right about "a lot" of stuff.
85 percent from your own list is way more substantive.
Re: Watch. You can't pick out 1 from a list of wrong and make that a win. Especially because he listed medical monitoring which the Early watches didn't do. Your attempt at listing an early smartwatch is also a fail because the Timex Datalink came out in 1994. Predicting a product that was for sale 5 years ago isn't a prediction.
MY GRAND PREDICTION: IN 2035 AN ELECTRIC CAR WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR SALE.
You're back to struggling for a single technicality out of a list of over a dozen correct predictions that you offered up?
Nice.
Re: Personal worn jewelry like watches, rings, pins and earrings will monitor body functions and have GPS
Yes gps devices existed before 1999. I had a CF GPS for my Nino. If you use those devices as what his intention was when he wrote about wearable tech, it's not a prediction so it is a fail.
Mmhmmmm, okay, well I guess you don't know about Garmin.
The Garmin foreRunner, a smart watch, developed in 2003 integrated user physical performance, fitness and GPS.
Paaass
But the book was written in 96 right? Wait, nope, earlier.
1999 is after 96 right?
The book the list of predictions is from was written in 1999.
He has written many books. He became famous because his earlier book was so accurate. Then Moore's law died which caused all his predictions for technology after 2005 to be very off because the huge compounding effect of Moore's law stopped.
Don't know how you're all so confused about this, but getting correct for a decade she's then technology changing didn't mean his prediction was incorrect.
It means he was correct, and then technology changed again.
Also, and this is going to blow your mind, Moore's law?
Not a prediction by kurzweil.
Fairly irrelevant except as a touchstone example given to tech-illiterates to understand how fast computing power increases
Most of his predictions he made in 1999 for 2009 were wrong. We have been through the list. You gave up rebuttals.
He didn't foresee the change in speed technology improvements which is why his predictions failed.
Why would you think Moore's law was Kurzweil's idea? It's called MOORE'S law.
He based his predictions on Moore. He referenced Moore's law many times and extrapolated.
Re: intelligent virtual assistant
"Thank you for your order" on a web order is an intelligent assistant? Lol. But that predates 1999 so it is still a fail.
Look what you wrote.
"Most routine business transactions, purchases travel reservations, take place between a human and a virtual personality."
That is a pass.
Maybe you should try for a new list?
Because all of these ones are a pass from your requirements of 99 to 2009.
You said your definition of a virtual personality is a webpage where you type in your order and the webpage replies "thank you for your order."
That existed before 1999.
Fail.
Of course you know that's not what he meant but you are grasping at straws because of your failures.
Re: digital distribution
Your claim that digital distribution was the majority by 2009 like Kurzweil claimed is false.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/190225/digital-and-physical-game-sales-in-the-us-since-2009/
That wasnot my cousin, but if it were I'm sure those stickers would be relevant.
They seem very written.
Re: palm pilot
The important part of the prediction was "no moving parts". He didn't predict the Palm pilot, it came out in 1997.
Re: driverless cars.
You can't take a half point. There were no driverless cars on the highways in 2009.
If something existed before 1999 (road sensors) it isn't a prediction so it's a fail. If it didn't exist by 2009 it is a fail.
I thought your whole thing was dividing these into half points based on the components of the statement.
You want it you got it, though.
Whatever gets you giggly.
But there's no half. Road sensors existed before 1999 so that's not a prediction and therefore a fail. Self driving on the highway didn't exist in 2009 and is therefore a fail. Both fails, 0 points.
You said the statement was incorrect, but with sheet road signs, that prediction is obviously correct.
Sorry, can't help you squeak out of this one.
What specific smart road device that was new between 1999 and 2009 are you referring to?
Because there were all sorts of smart road sensors in use the 1990's. In 1994 Palo Alto, the intersections had sensors so lights instantly turned green for you if you were the only person at the intersection. The on ramps to highways had smart sensors controlling lights to control merging traffic.
Re: display built into eye glasses.
AR in any form isn't the specific prediction of AR built into eye glasses. AR in eye glasses wasn't available in 2009 to consumers. AR was invented in 1968 so it isn't a prediction.
The prediction is the claim that AR was in eyeglasses, not that it would exist. That's why it is a fail.
You didn't say AR built into eyeglasses for consumers, you left out the consumers part.
But you're struggling, I get it.
Let's not take NASA's word for it, right?
What do they know about revolutionary tech, anyway?
Show me NASA AR built into eye glasses 1999-2009. Because the only thing I can find is from 2015.
If it existed before 1999 it's not a prediction. If I was invented after 2009 it's a fail.
Haha, sure, sure. Okay...
NASA had a vr lab since 92, let's see if we can find you ar glasses in your special time frame..
Looks like there's some software called Doug that used cameras and sensors in goggles for astronaut training in 2001.
Again if it already existed, THAT ISN'T A PREDICTION.
Pointing out all the things that existed before Kurzweil predicted they would be invented isn't helping your argument.
Oh, and then the hmd 1, which looks more like an AR headset you recognize was in 2008. Rapidly changed into modern looking visor by 2012.
Apparently they can see out and info is there also.
So there you go.
Double whammy
Those aren't eyeglasses. Those are AR goggle rigs that existed since 1968.
Sure. You might like these then:
2004: An outdoor helmet-mounted AR system was demonstrated by Trimble Navigation and the Human Interface Technology Laboratory (HIT lab).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL3C-OVQKWU
Boy, this seems difficult for you.
Goggles aren't eyeglasses. Those are goggles. NASA had the VIEW ar system in 1989.
https://youtu.be/TY8CyUQOncc?si=zIeWUGSwlavoQLA_
It's not a prediction if it existed 10 years earlier.
These are eyeglasses
https://www.meta.com/smart-glasses/wayfarer-shiny-black-clear
Re: reading on computers
As I said, if that's the criteria then that predates 1999. The Internet exploded in 1995. People were reading on their computers before 1999.
Reading didn't change until everyone had a smartphone which happened after 2009. Only 17% had a smartphone in 2009.
Reading didn't change until everyone had a smart watch?
You're going to have to give some source for that.
And blogs and forums didn't explode, domains exploded.
Blogs and forms and online reading exploded in the 2000s.
You're a decade off again.
But you know who is correct on that prediction?
Kurzweil
62% in 1999. 77% 2010.
So only a small change in PC use which means only a small change in the ability to read on a computer.
Smartphone adoption rate went from 0 in 2007 to 95% today. So everyone now has a computer.