4 ms·

Kurzweil's second nutrition-oriented book was coauthored with Terry Grossman, a licensed homeopath. It does make you raise your eyebrows.

natedsaint 14y ago
I'm finding this stuff out a lot, lately. Especially about Kurzweil. Is it fair to say that the futurist movement is less about cynicism/skepticism and more about idealism and optimism for the future, or is this just the case for Kurzweil? Are there other members of the futurist movement who would disagree with this endorsement by the homeopathic community?
- kanzure 14y ago
  None of the on-the-ground transhumanists take Ray very seriously. While he might genuinely be attempting to bring about advanced technology, I don't see how "get lots of publicity" is a viable method to reach his purported goals. He hasn't really worked on OCR since the 70s. Apparently, that's his claim to technological progress. Oh, also he did some electronic noisemakers. Still, I wonder about the 40 years between then and now. 40 years is a long time to work towards transhumanist technologies. But instead he has squandered it into publicity on top of his OCR accomplishments? There is a growing sentiment among transhumanists that his cheerleading and publicity campaigns aren't going to materialize advanced technology. We have to build it ourselves. But we already knew this, it's just that the "sit back and wait for it to happen" fairytale is very seductive. In fact, that's exactly what people want to hear. For somewhat-unrelated criticism regarding Ray Kurzweil, there are these emails from Paul D. Fernhout: http://heybryan.org/fernhout/ http://heybryan.org/fernhout/ But to be fair, you can still spot TSiN on random bookshelves when you go to hackerspaces. It's almost cute, really. Bias: irc.freenode.net ##hplusroadmap ("sponsored by George Church" just like everything else)
  - ThomPete 14y ago
    He made the Kurzweil synths and as far as I remember his OCR was for the disabled. Sometimes it's easy to disregard someone completely just because one think they take it too far. Imagine how a Davinci might look today. I do not buy Rays ideas on this matter either but there sure is a discussion worth having in there. Even despite some of the claims he makes.
    - kanzure 14y ago
      I'd be really curious to get a copy of the OCR software. I'd like to disassemble it and see what the fuss was about. I can hardly get tesseract to reliably work. <unnecessary sarcasm>Maybe Ray should jump in and fix tesseract for us.</unnecessary sarcasm>
      - ThomPete 14y ago
        All you need to do is look in the history book and realize that he was one of the few pepople working in that field. A more concrete thing was his text-to-speech synthesis. Anyway. I see no point in defending Ray or any of his ideas. Just saying that the man isn't stupid and have done quite a few inventions. To brush him of, as much as I disagree with some of his points, simply because he makes outragous claims seems a tad self-defeating.
      - UsChickens 14y ago
        Random programmer decides to cast his "expert" eye over others' work in bid to determine the value of such work. Who are you again?
  - philwelch 14y ago
    This concept of "on-the-ground transhumanists" interests me. Are there actually transhumanists who actually work on building transhuman stuff?
    - kanzure 14y ago
      > Are there actually transhumanists who actually work on building transhuman stuff? More than you might guess. There's a lot of participation within the do-it-yourself biohacking scene. Also, RepRap and other open source hardware projects tend to attract transhumanist talent. I don't mean to sound too biased but you should check out that IRC channel I mentioned.
    - waterlesscloud 14y ago
      A while back I interviewed with a startup doing transhumany things that was full of on-the-ground transhumanists and they were all quite serious about it. They're out there.
rmc 14y ago
a licensed homeopath Henriette, the late pet cat of Ben Goldacre, a UK anti-pseudoscience writer, is a licenced nutritionist. Poor old Hettie was able to get the certificate after she died. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2004/sep/30/badscience.research http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2004/sep/30/badscience.res...
JonnieCache 14y ago
>Terry Grossman, a licensed homeopath I am a fully licensed archmage. Anyone who wishes to get their journeyman warlocking certification should send 25 BTC to the address in my profile.
mtrimpe 14y ago
I never understood the hate for homeopathy from highly educated people. I won't touch it with a ten-foot pole myself, but homeopathy does get people the placebo effect and that's "A Good Thing" (tm). That our analytical skills have correctly identified that homeopathy can't really do anything and we thus have to resort to beliefs in the mind-body relationship and e.g. meditation to achieve similar benefits is actually too bad for us.... just popping some pills would've been a lot easier.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  > homeopathy does get people the placebo effect and that's "A Good Thing" (tm). No. Much like teaching religious stories as if they were the truth doesn't do us any favors. "So what there is no evidence it works? It worked for me." and then you have to undo the damage to what could have been a rational person.
- rmc 14y ago
  Homeopaths market and sell their products for serious life threatening diseases. Homeopaths don't tell people it's the placebo effect, they tell very sick people that they can cure them, and charge them for the pleasure. Homeopaths (and other pseduo science peddlers) make money out of people who are at their most desparate state by selling them lies.
  - psykotic 14y ago
    Homeopathy is woo-woo at its worst. But it seems plausible that the majority of practitioners believe as much in its efficacy as do patients. When you say they are selling lies, you ascribe malice where self-deceit may be the more likely explanation. Of course, no manner of good intentions will help those desperately ill people who would have been better served by conventional medicine.
    - rmc 14y ago
      Oh yes, I believe ignorance and self-delusion is more common then malice. However that doesn't excuse them totally. When it's literally a matter of life and death for someone else, you have a moral duty to ensure you're giving the right advice. Homeopaths are careless and other people die.

natedsaint 14y ago

I'm finding this stuff out a lot, lately. Especially about Kurzweil. Is it fair to say that the futurist movement is less about cynicism/skepticism and more about idealism and optimism for the future, or is this just the case for Kurzweil? Are there other members of the futurist movement who would disagree with this endorsement by the homeopathic community?

kanzure 14y ago
None of the on-the-ground transhumanists take Ray very seriously. While he might genuinely be attempting to bring about advanced technology, I don't see how "get lots of publicity" is a viable method to reach his purported goals. He hasn't really worked on OCR since the 70s. Apparently, that's his claim to technological progress. Oh, also he did some electronic noisemakers. Still, I wonder about the 40 years between then and now. 40 years is a long time to work towards transhumanist technologies. But instead he has squandered it into publicity on top of his OCR accomplishments? There is a growing sentiment among transhumanists that his cheerleading and publicity campaigns aren't going to materialize advanced technology. We have to build it ourselves. But we already knew this, it's just that the "sit back and wait for it to happen" fairytale is very seductive. In fact, that's exactly what people want to hear. For somewhat-unrelated criticism regarding Ray Kurzweil, there are these emails from Paul D. Fernhout: http://heybryan.org/fernhout/ http://heybryan.org/fernhout/ But to be fair, you can still spot TSiN on random bookshelves when you go to hackerspaces. It's almost cute, really. Bias: irc.freenode.net ##hplusroadmap ("sponsored by George Church" just like everything else)
- ThomPete 14y ago
  He made the Kurzweil synths and as far as I remember his OCR was for the disabled. Sometimes it's easy to disregard someone completely just because one think they take it too far. Imagine how a Davinci might look today. I do not buy Rays ideas on this matter either but there sure is a discussion worth having in there. Even despite some of the claims he makes.
  - kanzure 14y ago
    I'd be really curious to get a copy of the OCR software. I'd like to disassemble it and see what the fuss was about. I can hardly get tesseract to reliably work. <unnecessary sarcasm>Maybe Ray should jump in and fix tesseract for us.</unnecessary sarcasm>
    - ThomPete 14y ago
      All you need to do is look in the history book and realize that he was one of the few pepople working in that field. A more concrete thing was his text-to-speech synthesis. Anyway. I see no point in defending Ray or any of his ideas. Just saying that the man isn't stupid and have done quite a few inventions. To brush him of, as much as I disagree with some of his points, simply because he makes outragous claims seems a tad self-defeating.
    - UsChickens 14y ago
      Random programmer decides to cast his "expert" eye over others' work in bid to determine the value of such work. Who are you again?
- philwelch 14y ago
  This concept of "on-the-ground transhumanists" interests me. Are there actually transhumanists who actually work on building transhuman stuff?
  - kanzure 14y ago
    > Are there actually transhumanists who actually work on building transhuman stuff? More than you might guess. There's a lot of participation within the do-it-yourself biohacking scene. Also, RepRap and other open source hardware projects tend to attract transhumanist talent. I don't mean to sound too biased but you should check out that IRC channel I mentioned.
  - waterlesscloud 14y ago
    A while back I interviewed with a startup doing transhumany things that was full of on-the-ground transhumanists and they were all quite serious about it. They're out there.

rmc 14y ago

a licensed homeopath Henriette, the late pet cat of Ben Goldacre, a UK anti-pseudoscience writer, is a licenced nutritionist. Poor old Hettie was able to get the certificate after she died. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2004/sep/30/badscience.research http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2004/sep/30/badscience.res...

JonnieCache 14y ago

>Terry Grossman, a licensed homeopath I am a fully licensed archmage. Anyone who wishes to get their journeyman warlocking certification should send 25 BTC to the address in my profile.

mtrimpe 14y ago

I never understood the hate for homeopathy from highly educated people. I won't touch it with a ten-foot pole myself, but homeopathy does get people the placebo effect and that's "A Good Thing" (tm). That our analytical skills have correctly identified that homeopathy can't really do anything and we thus have to resort to beliefs in the mind-body relationship and e.g. meditation to achieve similar benefits is actually too bad for us.... just popping some pills would've been a lot easier.

rbanffy 14y ago
> homeopathy does get people the placebo effect and that's "A Good Thing" (tm). No. Much like teaching religious stories as if they were the truth doesn't do us any favors. "So what there is no evidence it works? It worked for me." and then you have to undo the damage to what could have been a rational person.
rmc 14y ago
Homeopaths market and sell their products for serious life threatening diseases. Homeopaths don't tell people it's the placebo effect, they tell very sick people that they can cure them, and charge them for the pleasure. Homeopaths (and other pseduo science peddlers) make money out of people who are at their most desparate state by selling them lies.
- psykotic 14y ago
  Homeopathy is woo-woo at its worst. But it seems plausible that the majority of practitioners believe as much in its efficacy as do patients. When you say they are selling lies, you ascribe malice where self-deceit may be the more likely explanation. Of course, no manner of good intentions will help those desperately ill people who would have been better served by conventional medicine.
  - rmc 14y ago
    Oh yes, I believe ignorance and self-delusion is more common then malice. However that doesn't excuse them totally. When it's literally a matter of life and death for someone else, you have a moral duty to ensure you're giving the right advice. Homeopaths are careless and other people die.