I'm curious how many people have actually read his books before attacking his positions. A lot of the criticisms about his predictions seem to be based around t

I'm curious how many people have actually read his books before attacking his positions. A lot of the criticisms about his predictions seem to be based around the charts and graphs he's used in his Ted talks and articles. In his books, he goes into great detail describing each aspect of the GNR (Genetic, Nano, Robotics) revolutions that will contribute to the singularity. He's actually addressed a lot of the criticisms that seem to crop up in HN, etc. over and over. Forgive me if your position was based on having read his books (especially The Singularity is Near), but it didn't seem like it. Especially considering that cracking general AI is specifically mentioned as not being a requirement to obtain greater than human intelligence (for example, augmentation of biological human intelligence, specialized AI coming together to solve general problems, etc.). Also, his prediction for the Singularity is 2045 (32 years from now), so your figure of 16 years seems to be incorrect. Edit: D'oh, you were talking about the 2029 figure mentioned in the article, not the date of the technological singularity. I'm an idiot.