We regret to inform you that Ray Kurzweil is back on his bullshit
We regret to inform you that Ray Kurzweil is back on his bullshit
The Google futurist talks nanobots and avatars, deepfakes and elections – and why he is so optimistic about a future where we merge with computers
You're viewing part of a thread.
I'm not saying that.
You're making more incorrect assumptions.
1 0 ReplyYou said 100, now you claim you aren't saying that.
You are confused or a liar. This is beyond boring.
1 0 ReplyYou're incorrect again.
I said at least a hundred predictions on top of the 40 odd you want to talk about.
You aren't able to retain more than the most immediately recent comment.
This is your own burden and nobody else's.
1 0 ReplyiII said at least a hundred predictions on top of the 40 odd you want to talk about.
Stop lying. It's boring.
List your 100 with exact sources.1 0 ReplyI get it, you're bummed you can't convince anyone and you've lost the argument.
I'm pretty happy about it, though, so I'll leave you to do your own digging.
You need to learn one day.
1 0 ReplyYou: "Pointedly ignoring his 100 predictions that came true "
Me: list them.
You: that's not what I meant.
Stop lying.
1 0 ReplyAh, nagging up what I said because you're bitter.
Satisfying.
1 0 ReplyYou can't stand that I'm holding your lies to your face. You said 100. Show 100.
1 0 ReplyGo for it.
Clearly you live in your own little worried
1 0 ReplyGo for what? You said there were 100 correct predictions. When I asked you to show them you implied it was hyperbole. Then you repeated it.
Show the list of 100 or admit it was a lie.
I provided a list from his 1999 book of predictions for 2009. We argued the results. It was 25% accurate just like a 3rd party reporter concluded.
If you want to claim his accuracy is better, you need a new list with sources.
1 0 ReplyI admit what you said(and are saying) was based on lies and ignorance.
1 0 Reply