The first argument on IQ is the weakest of the article. We can't as a human increase IQ inherently outside of something like iodization. We can, however, creat

The first argument on IQ is the weakest of the article. We can't as a human increase IQ inherently outside of something like iodization. We can, however, create faster computers. This is the second or third argument, and here the author gets something fundamentally wrong. We have, for the past decades, used faster computers to help us make faster computers. Their argument is that it's self-limiting, but that's provably false viz current CPU architectures. The one thing the author skirts around that DOES seem to be a strike against the singularity is the asymptotic nature of those kinds of improvements. We can spend N amount of resources for a 100 unit improvement in speed/efficiency/whatnot, but spending 10N resources does not give us 1000 unit improvement, but rather 500 or 150.