From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!uunet!idtg!dow Wed Dec 18 16:02:25 EST 1991
Article 2215 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!uunet!idtg!dow
>From: dow@idtg.UUCP (Keith Dow)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Scaled up slug brains
Message-ID: <354@idtg.UUCP>
Date: 17 Dec 91 23:29:45 GMT
References: <40746@dime.cs.umass.edu> <352@idtg.UUCP> <40782@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Organization: Integrated Device Technology, Santa Clara
Lines: 32

>>Parts of the brain are understood now.  My estimate is that the brain
>>will be completely understood by the year 2050. 
>
>Send the rest of this to alt.horoscope.pseudo-scienc. My estimate is that
>anyone can come up with bullshit estimates about the progress of
>understanding compex systems, but that they aren't worth a great deal.

Anyone can say bullshit.  Of course if you have an idea to contribute,
your postings might be worth more.  

In artificial intelligence, certainly there have been bad predictions
about understanding complex systems.  Fortunately the space program
didn't suffer the same fate.  Kennedy set the goal of putting a man
on the moon before the 70's and it happened.   This of course meant
building and understanding a complex system.
 

There have been good predictions and bad predictions.  You blanket
statement is a little too dogmatic.

You might read the book "Mind Children" for data to back up my predictions.


>>We are now in the second industrial revolution.  The first was basically
>>amplifying human physical strength.  The second is amplifying the human mind.
>>
>Too much feedback in the amplifier, perhaps.


Considering the idea is from Kurzweil, your joke is especially interesting.
You might get his tape and book from from MIT and learn about his point of 
view.  


