"I'm saying may be wrong about the short term and he certainly can't be right indefinitely."
Sure he can, since you're the one who added the claim that it will continue indefinitely. What he says instead is that progress will continue until well beyond our point to predict what the resulting society will look like, due to the claimed fact that it will for instance include things like true AIs and brain uploading. I do not recall him talking about where the progress will stop; probably because it would be meaningless to us anyhow. If an AI from 2200 came to us now and tried to explain the latest cutting edge trends in the research into the ultimate limits of cognition we wouldn't get past the first paragraph.
Don't worry, you're hardly the only one to dismiss his claims without actually stopping for a moment and figuring out what he's actually claiming. I'm not exactly a strong Singulatarian myself but a lot of people really need to stop reading other people summaries of what he says (very very few are accurate enough to come to evaluate what he is saying) and read past his first couple of paragraphs before flipping the bozo bit. He may not be right, he's definitely not an idiot.
Ok, so your saying that Kurzweil's prediction is simply that exponential growth will continue until beyond the singularity?
If that is the case I don't really see how there is any logic in his claims. I understand that he has extrapolated an exponential curve, and I can see the potential of future tech if that exponential growth was to continue, but I don't really see what basis he has to claim that the exponential curve will not end tomorrow. I'm not saying that it will end tomorrow, I'm just saying that you can't base a prediction on the idea that exponential growth will continue because you have absolutely zero data about when it's likely end is.
"Ok, so your saying that Kurzweil's prediction is simply that exponential growth will continue until beyond the singularity?"
Why don't you stop waiting for me to tell you and spend some honest time with the ideas? Of course you don't see how there is any logic to his claims, you haven't seen his claims at all.
Or, alternatively, realize you don't know what they are and decide not to worry about it. This is fine too. No joke. There are all kinds of times when I take this option. It's not bad to not know somebody's opinions, or criticize them when you know them; the problem is in the criticism when you don't actually know them.
Sure he can, since you're the one who added the claim that it will continue indefinitely. What he says instead is that progress will continue until well beyond our point to predict what the resulting society will look like, due to the claimed fact that it will for instance include things like true AIs and brain uploading. I do not recall him talking about where the progress will stop; probably because it would be meaningless to us anyhow. If an AI from 2200 came to us now and tried to explain the latest cutting edge trends in the research into the ultimate limits of cognition we wouldn't get past the first paragraph.
Don't worry, you're hardly the only one to dismiss his claims without actually stopping for a moment and figuring out what he's actually claiming. I'm not exactly a strong Singulatarian myself but a lot of people really need to stop reading other people summaries of what he says (very very few are accurate enough to come to evaluate what he is saying) and read past his first couple of paragraphs before flipping the bozo bit. He may not be right, he's definitely not an idiot.