4 ms·

Anyone seen one of his talks or ppts? Anyone else get those creepy cult feelings? Anyone?

aswanson 19y ago
Yes. I've laid out my objections to his timetables here before: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=142175 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=142175 I like what his books do in terms of sparking the imagination, but take his claims with the same level of skepticism as I do an infomercial. Another thing is the repitition; if you've read Age of Intelligent Machines you've read Age of Spiritual Machines as well as Singularity is Near. Some of the predictions of Spiritual Machines have fallen short already: Most people don't use speech recognition to enter data into computers. Granted, he chose 2009 as that target date, but I feel safe that won't be the main method of entry in a few months.
- dbreunig 19y ago
  Thanks much for the much better articulation!
- ericb 19y ago
  Speech rec with Naturally speaking, as of a year ago when my buddy broke his arm and tryed it, was getting there, but still not usable for him. Speech is not as nice as typing for entering data. Typing seems [citation needed] faster and like less work. Also, in an office, the voices absorb mental bandwidth from everyone in earshot. So I think in this case Kurzweil may or may not be wrong about the quality of the technology in a year, but he's definitely wrong about speech being a preferred method for interfacing with a computer.
  - Novash 19y ago
    Solved? I think this qualifies within his predictions. http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/22037/ http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/22037/
    - aswanson 19y ago
      I'm guessing that given the difficulty of characterizing voiced speech is still inaccurate, the more difficult task of translating neural impulses to speech will result in even further degradation of performance. Unsolved: At the moment, the device has a limited vocabulary: 150 words and phrases. A long way to go.
      - Novash 19y ago
        They still have an year and a half, which means twice the number of transistors on their next hardware. Give them the benefit of doubt.
        aswanson 19y ago
        No, I won't. The problem is not transistors; the problem is in the lack of understanding how speech recognition works. It is very difficult to get right and it is highly unlikely that those problems will be solved completely within the next 18 months. They could double the transistor count now by running the algorithm on a better DSP or Cell processor.
- dreish 19y ago
  I laid out my objections to your objections here: http://www.kurzweilai.net/mindx/frame.html?main=show_thread.php?rootID%3D59556%23id81837 http://www.kurzweilai.net/mindx/frame.html?main=show_thread.... I wouldn't be surprised if he's spot-on about the technology of speech recognition getting to that practical level exactly on his predicted schedule -- it's one of those kinds of things he has been obsessed with on a very technical level for many years, and it really has been improving rapidly. The chief reason I doubt most people would choose it is that it just doesn't work in an environment with other people around. However, since developing tendonitis in my right hand, I've often thought I'd try it just to give my hands time to heal. It could get good enough within three or four years that people will do it anyway, just because it will be faster and more comfortable than typing for all but a handful of people. I agree that some of his other predictions are a little nutty, but only by degrees.
dejb 19y ago
I don't think it is possible to suggest that you could live forever in a world that will be completely different without appearing a bit religious/cult-ish. That really is pretty much exactly the same message as many religions. But I don't this this alters the merits (positively or negatively) of his argument.
Novash 19y ago
Yes, I felt those too. Thought it was only me. His idea of future scares me.

Yes. I've laid out my objections to his timetables here before: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=142175 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=142175 I like what his books do in terms of sparking the imagination, but take his claims with the same level of skepticism as I do an infomercial. Another thing is the repitition; if you've read Age of Intelligent Machines you've read Age of Spiritual Machines as well as Singularity is Near. Some of the predictions of Spiritual Machines have fallen short already: Most people don't use speech recognition to enter data into computers. Granted, he chose 2009 as that target date, but I feel safe that won't be the main method of entry in a few months.

dbreunig 19y ago
Thanks much for the much better articulation!
ericb 19y ago
Speech rec with Naturally speaking, as of a year ago when my buddy broke his arm and tryed it, was getting there, but still not usable for him. Speech is not as nice as typing for entering data. Typing seems [citation needed] faster and like less work. Also, in an office, the voices absorb mental bandwidth from everyone in earshot. So I think in this case Kurzweil may or may not be wrong about the quality of the technology in a year, but he's definitely wrong about speech being a preferred method for interfacing with a computer.
- Novash 19y ago
  Solved? I think this qualifies within his predictions. http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/22037/ http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/22037/
  - aswanson 19y ago
    I'm guessing that given the difficulty of characterizing voiced speech is still inaccurate, the more difficult task of translating neural impulses to speech will result in even further degradation of performance. Unsolved: At the moment, the device has a limited vocabulary: 150 words and phrases. A long way to go.
    - Novash 19y ago
      They still have an year and a half, which means twice the number of transistors on their next hardware. Give them the benefit of doubt.
      - aswanson 19y ago
        No, I won't. The problem is not transistors; the problem is in the lack of understanding how speech recognition works. It is very difficult to get right and it is highly unlikely that those problems will be solved completely within the next 18 months. They could double the transistor count now by running the algorithm on a better DSP or Cell processor.
dreish 19y ago
I laid out my objections to your objections here: http://www.kurzweilai.net/mindx/frame.html?main=show_thread.php?rootID%3D59556%23id81837 http://www.kurzweilai.net/mindx/frame.html?main=show_thread.... I wouldn't be surprised if he's spot-on about the technology of speech recognition getting to that practical level exactly on his predicted schedule -- it's one of those kinds of things he has been obsessed with on a very technical level for many years, and it really has been improving rapidly. The chief reason I doubt most people would choose it is that it just doesn't work in an environment with other people around. However, since developing tendonitis in my right hand, I've often thought I'd try it just to give my hands time to heal. It could get good enough within three or four years that people will do it anyway, just because it will be faster and more comfortable than typing for all but a handful of people. I agree that some of his other predictions are a little nutty, but only by degrees.

dejb 19y ago

I don't think it is possible to suggest that you could live forever in a world that will be completely different without appearing a bit religious/cult-ish. That really is pretty much exactly the same message as many religions. But I don't this this alters the merits (positively or negatively) of his argument.

Novash 19y ago

Yes, I felt those too. Thought it was only me. His idea of future scares me.