"There is not the slightest reason to believe in a coming singularity ... Look at domed cities, jet-pack commuting, underwater cities, mile-high buildings, and

"There is not the slightest reason to believe in a coming singularity ... Look at domed cities, jet-pack commuting, underwater cities, mile-high buildings, and nuclear-powered automobiles" That seems like a pretty terrible analogy. All of those examples are possible today, but their cost doesn't justify their utility, and nobody pursues them. On the other hand, it's fairly easy to think of practical uses for artificial intelligence, and research in this area is actively pursued by researchers around the world. Like I said, it would take someone incredibly egotistical (apparently such as a Harvard psychology professor) to suggest artificial intelligence isn't possible based on where we are right now, where we were 30 years ago, or where it appears we're headed over the next 30 years. Based on this quote, Pinker's conception of the world doesn't appear to extend beyond the span of his own lifetime. "The fact that you can visualize a future in your imagination is not evidence that it is likely or even possible." Nor is the fact that some of his childhood fantasies didn't come to fruition evidence that it's impossible or even unlikely. What's his point? One bad argument doesn't right another.