5 ms·

About Ray Kurzweil ~ "He's actually just another Deepak Chopra for the computer science cognoscenti."

by c1sc0 16y ago

mechanical_fish 16y ago
I really understand where this article is coming from. Spend a decade in a biology laboratory working day and night just to figure out a tiny subset of the role of one simple protein, and you'll find that pseudoscientific handwaving no longer sounds like a pleasant breeze, but like the grating of sharpened fingernails on a chalkboard. (For physicists the equivalent torture is a movie, which goes by the name of "What the Bleep...", that came out a few years ago. OMFG if you want to drive me into a towering rage just show me ten minutes of that film. It's like watching someone make spitballs out of the manuscript of the Eroica symphony.)
- arethuza 16y ago
  Wow - that "What the Bleep..." does look remarkably bad. The trailer is Poe's Law in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7dhztBnpxg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7dhztBnpxg I guess you don't want to watch that again? ;-)
  - mechanical_fish 16y ago
    It is deadly dangerous for me to watch a clip from that film. It could inspire dozens of hours of rage-filled but closely-argued physics lectures. Given the slightest provocation, I will go all xkcd.com/386 on its ass and my actual career will die of neglect. Now, I need to go calm myself by fixing some bugs before I start to throw things. ;)
    - arethuza 16y ago
      For what it's worth, I was having a conversation with my son (he's 11) about the key differences between scientific and religious beliefs - I think I'll use that film as an example of how it can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference - especially when people present what are essentially religious beliefs using terminology derived from science. (NB I remember reading some Erich von Däniken books when I was 9 or 10 and getting awfully excited - I was quite upset when I found that people could just make stuff up and present it as science).
      - mechanical_fish 16y ago
        That's the extra-infuriating thing. In theory, I'm completely down with the project of using parables based on science to convey religious ideas. Religion is built out of the raw materials that the world gives you. If we live in a world full of science and technology, we should expect our parables and our myths and our stories to be filled with science and technology. (Cue a chorus line of Doctor Who cosplayers.) So, in theory, I could have been okay with What the Bleep. In practice, however, it is just horribly grating -- way more grating than any SF, even the dumbest SF.
      - jimbokun 16y ago
        "Erich von Däniken" The Nova debunking of Chariots of the Gods was epic, and a important lesson to me as a high school student not to take scientific sounding arguments at face value. Also, an important lesson in not underestimating human intelligence and creativity. Most of the debunking was simply figuring out how ancient peoples did things we now think are impossible without modern technology.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
    - bld 16y ago
      Turn that rage into a popular webcomic, then you could start a new career!
      - mechanical_fish 16y ago
        I keep meaning to practice some drawing. I'm half serious about that. One of my personal heroes is this guy: http://www.timhunkin.com/ http://www.timhunkin.com/ That Randall Munroe is also a personal hero probably goes without saying at this point.

About Ray Kurzweil ~ "He's actually just another Deepak Chopra for the computer science cognoscenti."

by c1sc0 16y ago

About Ray Kurzweil ~ "He's actually just another Deepak Chopra for the computer science cognoscenti."

I really understand where this article is coming from. Spend a decade in a biology laboratory working day and night just to figure out a tiny subset of the role of one simple protein, and you'll find that pseudoscientific handwaving no longer sounds like a pleasant breeze, but like the grating of sharpened fingernails on a chalkboard. (For physicists the equivalent torture is a movie, which goes by the name of "What the Bleep...", that came out a few years ago. OMFG if you want to drive me into a towering rage just show me ten minutes of that film. It's like watching someone make spitballs out of the manuscript of the Eroica symphony.)

arethuza 16y ago
Wow - that "What the Bleep..." does look remarkably bad. The trailer is Poe's Law in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7dhztBnpxg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7dhztBnpxg I guess you don't want to watch that again? ;-)
- mechanical_fish 16y ago
  It is deadly dangerous for me to watch a clip from that film. It could inspire dozens of hours of rage-filled but closely-argued physics lectures. Given the slightest provocation, I will go all xkcd.com/386 on its ass and my actual career will die of neglect. Now, I need to go calm myself by fixing some bugs before I start to throw things. ;)
  - arethuza 16y ago
    For what it's worth, I was having a conversation with my son (he's 11) about the key differences between scientific and religious beliefs - I think I'll use that film as an example of how it can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference - especially when people present what are essentially religious beliefs using terminology derived from science. (NB I remember reading some Erich von Däniken books when I was 9 or 10 and getting awfully excited - I was quite upset when I found that people could just make stuff up and present it as science).
    - mechanical_fish 16y ago
      That's the extra-infuriating thing. In theory, I'm completely down with the project of using parables based on science to convey religious ideas. Religion is built out of the raw materials that the world gives you. If we live in a world full of science and technology, we should expect our parables and our myths and our stories to be filled with science and technology. (Cue a chorus line of Doctor Who cosplayers.) So, in theory, I could have been okay with What the Bleep. In practice, however, it is just horribly grating -- way more grating than any SF, even the dumbest SF.
    - jimbokun 16y ago
      "Erich von Däniken" The Nova debunking of Chariots of the Gods was epic, and a important lesson to me as a high school student not to take scientific sounding arguments at face value. Also, an important lesson in not underestimating human intelligence and creativity. Most of the debunking was simply figuring out how ancient peoples did things we now think are impossible without modern technology.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - bld 16y ago
    Turn that rage into a popular webcomic, then you could start a new career!
    - mechanical_fish 16y ago
      I keep meaning to practice some drawing. I'm half serious about that. One of my personal heroes is this guy: http://www.timhunkin.com/ http://www.timhunkin.com/ That Randall Munroe is also a personal hero probably goes without saying at this point.