Hey pdog this isn't really in response to you - it's more something that's been bothering me for awhile - but who the hell appointed Gary Marcus the arbiter of all things AI?
The New Yorker apparently hired this guy to be an AI columnist, and he has no background in either neuroscience or computer science, only psychology.
If you read his articles, he veers wildly from "strong AI ain't gonna happen" to "AI could destroy us all", the only common thread being pessimism. Meanwhile, he displays a frightening lack of understanding of the subject matter, and perhaps most disturbingly, in some of his more alarmist articles advocates that computer scientists should step aside and make room for psychologists, philosophers, lawyers, and politicians to sort out these thorny issues at the big boy table.
Kurzweil is certainly fair game for legitimate criticism, but Marcus calling Kurzweil a joke is an even big joke in itself.
The New Yorker apparently hired this guy to be an AI columnist, and he has no background in either neuroscience or computer science, only psychology.
If you read his articles, he veers wildly from "strong AI ain't gonna happen" to "AI could destroy us all", the only common thread being pessimism. Meanwhile, he displays a frightening lack of understanding of the subject matter, and perhaps most disturbingly, in some of his more alarmist articles advocates that computer scientists should step aside and make room for psychologists, philosophers, lawyers, and politicians to sort out these thorny issues at the big boy table.
Kurzweil is certainly fair game for legitimate criticism, but Marcus calling Kurzweil a joke is an even big joke in itself.