Ray Kuzweil at the MIT/XPrize BCI workshop

[TamikoKeciazv379]

geil ich wiege 300 kilo

[rRobertSmith]

kurzweil must get way tired of explaining this over and over again, (like the beach boys singing the same song over and over) to non geniuses

[qturner]

If you had say, a MINI camera installed into your eye when you're first born (work with me here!) you could theoretically, have that attached to ANOTHER TINY WIRE that goes somewhere else (we'll leave that part up to Ray @ 2029), and you could have it record everything you see for your whole life.

NO more arguing when shit happened, or who saw what. Eye witness testimony, hacked used in trials! This is going to get out of control................

[importfilta]

Do I see some illuminate rings? MMMMMMMMMM....

[realisticHomeboy]

Any news about how we (someone) will have achieved something in some number of years, is simply not news.

[silversobe]

Kurzweil tells it like it is.

[snarper]

@n4979338

I hope that you are wrong. I would very much like to "merge" with our technology . So, that instead of being replaced, I would simply augment myself. I take this idea from one of my favorite sci-fi movies called "Ghost in the Shell". If you haven't seen it, I strongly recommend it.

[n4979338]

Maybe I should just take it easy. If this is true by the time I am half way through my working life I will be replaceable by a computer equal to or greater than my brain - probably with a superior engineered body too.

By the time I will be at retirement age one computer will be the equivalent of the whole human race.

Our technology will exceed us in all ways.

My conclusion - take it easy - it will be clear we can't compete with technology anymore if all this is true...if it is true.

[lollolllolllll]

whle computing may be increasing exponentially- innovation, novelty and creativity are not. These factors should be cross-correlated into Kurzweil's predictions. Communication my increase creativity, allowing more access to a wide ariety of ideas, but it's not an expoential growth. Creative information must first filter through the human brain, which by all account has not significantly increased in working intelligence over several thousands of years.

[OxygenBurglar]

I'm a moron just because I question the validity of Kurzweil's 2009 predictions. OK.

I can't see any smart roads, 30 GB computers that you wear on your ring finger and complex images being directly beamed onto the retina - technologies that Kurzweil really did believe would happen by 2009 - hitting the mainstream anytime soon.

Even Ray himself has shifted these 2009 predictions to 2020, which throws into question the dates for his later, more fanciful predictions.

[Blackthornerose]

Ray Kurzweil is a futurist, not a psychic.

He's making predictions about what is likely and possible based on existing technologies. He can't also predict all the market forces that make what is possible technologically become available to the larger markets. Many things have been invented and are now possible that are not widely available yet. My advice to you? Read more, write less.

Otherwise you just display your ignorance and arrogance. History will remember Kurzweil when your name is dust.

[matThaHatter]

@Blackthornerose Bravo, bravo. A better than average ability to memorise and a dictionary can be a dangerous thing. The internet and free access to information are great, but it would be great if it all came with a booklet of tips for when to take the cotton out of one's ears, and put it in one's mouth.

[Blackthornerose]

@matThaHatter You didn't respond in a meaningful way

to anything I said. I can always tell when I've frustrated

a poor loser in an argument, instead of responding to my argument,

they just start right in insulting me, with no explanation provided, like you did here.

Do us all a favor, Child, if you can't add something intelligent to the actual discussion,

don't add anything at all.

[matThaHatter]

@Blackthornerose Are you SERIOUS?! I was COMPLIMENTING you, you jackass! I COMPLETELY AGREE with what you said. Do you know what "bravo" means? Do a lot of people begin insulting you with phrases like "Bravo," or maybe "Well said?"

Now I wish I HAD insulted you. Maybe that's your thing.Are you so used to it that you see it everywhere; or maybe by "seeing" hostility everywhere you justify your egotism & cynicism. Oh, gotta go. It's almost dark, & us "CHILDREN" gotta get home. Asshole. Happy now?

[Blackthornerose]

@matThaHatter My humblest apologies, I sincerely thought you were being sarcastic with your bravos

and were telling me to shove cotton in my mouth. And yes, I am a bit sensitive. I'm constantly being told to go

"F" myself by Teapartiers these days. The current violent nature of public discourse has me set a bit on edge.

But that's not your fault. I misunderstood you. Mea Culpa. I hope you can forgive my error.

[matThaHatter]

@Blackthornerose No problem; don't worry about it. Looking back, I probably could have been more clear. But NOW I'm pissed for having to look up "Mea Culpa;"(J/K) I don't want to start an apology war,& honestly I didn't expect an apology from you, so I was a bit rude in reply, so sorry.

ANYWAY!What I meant at first was that I'm SO TIRED of the way people get a bit of information on a subject,& suddenly they feel qualified to make statements w/an air of ABSOLUTE SURETY, you know? (continue>)

[matThaHatter]

@matThaHatter (cont)Of course,people have the right to speak with confidence on whatever they like,but it often seems like the most cursory understanding of something gives people that confidence. See what I mean?

I know quite a bit about a lot of things,but a LOT about very few. And anyone with an education now-a-days knows how specialized EVERY DIFF. FIELD has become.Though this can help ID the fakers,it also means that their IGNORANCE of how IGNORANT they are makes them pretty much (cont>)

[matThaHatter]

@matThaHatter IMPERVIOUS to any new information that isn't at least based on the assumptions they hold,or offers something EVEN MORE desirable to their personal desires. Does that make sense? I'm sorry to ramble, but I don't usually do well with small talk(as you noticed); if something is worth saying at all, it's worth saying accurately.

So there it is.People who never ask questions,or make statements w/out room for adjustment,usually aren't as smart as they'd like you to think they are.adios

[OxygenBurglar]

If it's accelerating exponentially as Ray says, then where's my fat insulin receptor inhibitor pills that will let me eat ravenously and yet remain slim? And my virtual reality glasses that beam the image directly to my retina? And my ring-sized computer that generates said imagery to those glasses via wireless transfer? And the smart roads that assist my car in driving by itself?

[OrangeChickenMonkey]

Moron.

[flowover73]

@OxygenBurglar Those ideas are only conceived because technologies point in those directions. You're thriving in the age of convenience right now and for you, it's not convenient they're only being talked about right now, so for you it's a bad idea. Accelerating implies that it begins slowly. The law of accelerating returns is logarithmic. Look at how fast cell phones went from a niche device to ubiquitous usage.You're probably too young to remember when no one had cell phones or computers.

[odestiny]

@OxygenBurglar....Grasshopper stands on the tracks, sees no train, so he says it's a bogus fantasy.

[hotamali]

@OxygenBurglar Yes a few of his preditcions didn't come true for '09, but but you are clearly cherry picking. The majority did in one form or another. Also, just because a technology hasn't become widley available yet doens't mean it hasn't been invented yet.

[OxygenBurglar]

Ray, the crackpot whose predictions for 2009 didn't happen. The Law of Accelerating Returns is a bogus fantasy.

[kakapo989]

hey OxygenBurglar I read your profile

and clearly the hole in Rays socks is worth more than your entire being so if you have nothing to contribute just STFU! ok?

[matThaHatter]

@kakapo989 tttt

[Pippykinz]

The amount of turgid fantasy in this video accelerates exponentially until we reach the Singularity source of all slack jawed speculation that is Ray Kurzweil's rectum.

[undergroundresistor]

Ray Kurzweil, is this the guy who said in 1999 that by 2020, there will be a One World Government? Can we trust him? Or is he with the Bilderberg clan?

[matchbox555]

wake me up when they invent the full sensory virtual playboy mansion

[matchory]

Right on, siciliano29.

[siciliano29]

An actual proven track record is one of the best ways to boost your credibility....Kurzweil has exactly that, so to not believe him is pure folly.

People who think he's crazy need to ditch their primitive linear thinking, and start thinking like a true visionary - exponentially, and in 3 dimensions.

[timen1986]

@siciliano29

YES! I love your brain

[vrshowdown]

@siciliano29 lol you talking just like him

[0murdock0]

Ha, nevemind, he just answered my question.

[0murdock0]

I've often wondered if the logarithmic growth in technology is perceived by us as being linear. Take the Playstation for example. The hardware itself advances logarithmically from generation to generation, but in terms of what we can visually recognize, each generation seems to follow a linear path. I have no way of quantifying this, but it seems as the jump from each console generation to the next, doesn't have much variation.

[matchory]

Ray is from the future.

[tommytalks77]

erm, shouldn't you be able to get a decent sound out of your exponentially growing audio-recording technology?

5 stars for Ray, 1 star for the poor audio engineering...

Rather embarrassing, lol...

[QuanSai]

Grow up. Seriously...

[Illimitus]

Do you need to simulate the human brain to develop a robot that can displace vast amounts of the human workforce?

No.

[enantiomer2000]

not necessarily, but it may be the most expedient means.

[benayadoron]

does anyone know if there are any resolutions as to the prize money and the criteria?