3 ms·
I don't agree in this context. The author wrote an entire article about his position, and dismissing it entirely because some "luminary" disagrees is not an int
by cowpig 5y ago
I don't agree in this context. The author wrote an entire article about his position, and dismissing it entirely because some "luminary" disagrees is not an interesting response.
OP didn't even bother to point out how or why Kurzweil purportedly disagrees.
- tech-historian 5y agoI thought it was obvious. Clearly it was not. Ray Kurzweil is a futurist who has spent multiple decades researching this topic and has written multiple books on it. His bio speaks for itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil
- mindcrime 5y agoI guess I interpreted tech-historian's post a little differently than you. Likewise, I don't support dismissing Kelly's article out-of-hand, based on Kurzweil's position. But I do think it's fair to raise the issue in terms of "why should one take Kevin Kelly seriously on this?"