3 ms·
> He did admit on stage Wednesday that he thought we'd have self-driving cars by 2009. > "Now that's not completely wrong," he said. "If I had said 2015, I th
by 88e282102ae2e5b 11y ago
> He did admit on stage Wednesday that he thought we'd have self-driving cars by 2009.
> "Now that's not completely wrong," he said. "If I had said 2015, I think it would've been correct, but they're still not in mainstream use. So even the [predictions] that were wrong were directionally correct."
So if we're going to ignore the year, he might as well make all of his predictions just be "eventually, we'll accomplish X". The cognitive dissonance of Ray Kurzweil is impressive.
- kardos 11y ago> So if we're going to ignore the year, he might as well make all of his predictions just be "eventually, we'll accomplish X". The cognitive dissonance of Ray Kurzweil is impressive. So there's no value in being close? Being off by six years is the same as being off by eight centuries?
- 88e282102ae2e5b 11y agoWell, where does he draw the line? Will he claim success when a prediction comes true, but ten years late? 15? What is the definition of a failed prediction, according to Ray Kurzweil? Here's a scenario: It's 2028, and my doctor says I'm in the early stages of Alzheimers. Do I sell everything and try to knock items off my bucket list, or do I keep working like everything's normal and wait for the advent of nanobots? If Kurzweil had a model (other than a linear regression, please) I could at least make some educated guesses. But he's basically just a science fiction author who has decided to tack years onto his stories. I don't know what I'm supposed to do with that.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]