How are Kurzweil's Predictions Faring?

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________

-T H E

COMPUTER ITSELF

Predictions made for 2009 in The Age of Spiritual Machines The following is an analysis of predictions for 2009 made about the future of computing in the book The Age of Spiritual Machines, which was written in the mid to late 1990s. Kurzweil has already done an analysis of all of his predictions, but he was fairly liberal with this grading. 86%?

Sorry Mr. Kurzweil, that's why students aren't allowed to grade themselves. Let's see how these predictions really fare with both a strict and a liberal interpretation, and see how many were already true 10 years ago (analysis follows): STRICT INTERPRETATION

BROAD INTERPRETATION

KURZWEIL SAYS

1

TRUE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

2

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

3.1

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

3.2

FALSE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

4

FALSE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ESSENTIALLY CORRECT

5.1

FALSE

FALSE

ESSENTIALLY CORRECT

5.2

FALSE

FALSE

ESSENTIALLY CORRECT

6.1

PROBABLY FALSE

PROBABLY FALSE

CORRECT

6.2

FALSE

FALSE

CORRECT

7

FALSE

FALSE

CORRECT

8

PROBABLY FALSE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

9

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

10

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

11

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

12

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

13

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

14.1

FALSE

FALSE

PARTIALLY CORRECT

14.2

FALSE

PROBABLY FALSE

PARTIALLY CORRECT

15.1

FALSE

FALSE

PARTIALLY CORRECT

15.2

TRUE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

PARTIALLY CORRECT

15.3

FALSE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

PARTIALLY CORRECT

16.1

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

16.2

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

17

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

18.1

TRUE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

18.2

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

19

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

20

FALSE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

PARTIALLY CORRECT

21

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

22

FALSE

FALSE

ESSENTIALLY CORRECT

23.1

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

23.2

FALSE

FALSE

CORRECT

24

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

CORRECT

25.1

FALSE

FALSE

PARTIALLY CORRECT

25.2

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

PARTIALLY CORRECT

26

TRUE

TRUE

CORRECT

C.

TRUE

ALREADY TRUE IN 1999

-

||

Page | 1

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ 1. Computers | The rise & ubiquity of portable computers PREDICTION:

Individuals primarily use portable computers.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

True Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: This is a prediction for which Kurzweil probably deserves some credit.

Laptops have indeed surpassed desktops in sales, but consider what he would have said if they hadn't, and then consider the prevalence of pda's, pagers, gameboys, cdplayers, calculators, etc in 1999. With a broad interpretation this was already true in 1999. With no way to get a prediction wrong it's not much of a prediction is it?

2. Computers | Portable computers lighter, thinner PREDICTION:

Portable computers will have become dramatically lighter and thinner than the notebook computers of ten years ago.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: Quite a prediction.

3. Computers | Wearable personal computers & devices PREDICTION:

(1) Personal computers are available in a wide range of sizes and shapes, and (2) are commonly embedded in clothing and jewelry such as wristwatches, rings, earrings and other body ornaments

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999 False Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: 3.1 is hardly a prediction. As for 3.2 it's still very much a novelty when someone has a microprocessor of any sort embedded in clothing. It happens, sure, but as a novelty it's hardly common. Taking a broader interpretation, fast food chains have been giving out watches that talk or play games for a decade now. In fast food. To children.

||

Page | 2

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ 4. Computers | Small but high-resolution interfaces PREDICTION:

Computers with a high-resolution visual interface range from rings and pins and credit cards up to the size of a thin book.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

False Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: From a strict perspective we still don't have high-resolution interfaces the size of rings or pins (Kurzweil doesn't include them in his defense at least), but the real problem with this prediction is that “high-resolution” is a relative term. We've had displays slightly larger than the size of credit cards for decades now (the Newton) and these displays were always billed as high-resolution.

5. Computers | Networked computers on and around us PREDICTION:

(1) People typically have at least a dozen computers on and around their bodies, (2) which are networked using “body LANs” (local area networks).

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

False False False False

DISCUSSION: (3.1) Now, I'm only falsifying this with anecdotal evidence, granted, but consider the photo below, if you will. I live in a household that has a higher number of personal computers than the average home. The below is a photo of two peoples' workstations, and we're counting the computers of both in a 10' diameter without changing anything.

Stictly:

Broadly adding multiple cores and “real” microprocessors:

Laptop

–

1

Laptop Second Core –

1

Cell phones

–

2

Laptop Video Card

–

1

Server

–

1

Desktop Second Core –

1

Desktop

–

1

Desktop Video Card –

1

Router

–

1

Tablet

–

1

Total

–

6

ExternalHD

–

1

Total

–

12

||

Page | 3

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ So in an positively atypical environment for two people we barely get 12. The only way to get more is to count the microprocessors for each hard drive in each computer (or similar nonsense) and even in that case, using (multiple) embedded microprocessors to control devices has been standard architecture for over a decade and would then probably make the prediction already true in 1999.

(3.2) As for “body LAN” do we really need to say much?

6. Computers | No moving parts, electronic memory PREDICTION:

(1) For the most part, these truly personal computers have no moving parts. (2) Memory is completely electronic.

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Probably False Probably False False False

DISCUSSION: (6.1) We should note that when Kurzweil says “personal computer” he is referring to any computing device that “serves the needs of individuals”. Even accepting this incredibly broad definition of a personal computer, his prediction is probably false, though hard to conclusively falsify. The first problem is in comparing all “truly personal computers” to what people actually consider personal computers. Desktops and laptops still almost exclusively use magnetic storage, as do most servers more specifically. So even accepting that music players, cell phones, etc use electronic storage, there are probably enough actual personal computers to throw into question his “for the most part”.

The second problem comes more from the implication of his statement than from the statement itself. When you consider all of the information accessed on “truly personal computers,” only a relatively small portion of that total information is stored on devices.

Most of the information accessed from a smart phone, for example, is on the web, stored on a server someplace. Thus most information is either directly (home computers) or indirectly (servers providing web storage) stored on magnetic storage.

As for 6.2, this is patently false, unless he means electronic in such a broad way as to imply “uses electricity” (which I wouldn't put past him if he thought he could get away with it), but in that case it would already have been true in 1999.

||

Page | 4

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ 7. Computers | Keyboardless computers PREDICTION:

Most portable computers do not have keyboards.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

False False

DISCUSSION: Taking a strict interpretation, tablet sales were comparatively nonexistent in 2009 and laptops all still had/have keyboards. More broadly including cellphones, only 20% of those sold in 2009 were smart phones according to research by the Nielson Company, and it's incredibly rare to find keyboardless feature phones.

That doesn't take into account the fact that some smart phones still have alphanumeric keyboards, nor the fact that this analysis only considers alphanumeric keyboards. If we include iPods for example, the circle button layout would still be a physical keyboard, as would the physical buttons on game devices, mp3 players, cameras, and non-alphanumeric keyboards on smart phones.

As a final note, Kurzweil himself observes that touchscreen displays generally use alpha-numeric keyboards. These are technically keyboards, though not physical.

These last two points may seem pedantic (and they are), but if voice control were ubiquitous today (another prediction), he could have insisted that he had not meant keyboards of any type.

8. Computers | Digital objects on personal servers PREDICTION:

Most users have servers in their homes and offices where they keep large stores of digital “objects,” including their software, databases, documents, music, and movies

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Probably False Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: Strictly speaking, most users do not have servers. Of course it's true that all of the ones he lists in his defense of his predictions exist and some homes have them, but most computer users do not. Home servers are still described as a “niche market” by sites such as Newegg and Techinfo.

But let's be more charitable and use his own defense. He claims that this prediction is correct because of the fact that “Most computer users have a main computer (whether it is their desktop or notebook) where they keep documents, personal databases, music, TV shows, movies, ebooks, and other digital objects. In some cases, these objects may be distributed among multiple computers...”

Ooops. That was true a decade ago.

||

Page | 5

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ 9. Computers | Digital media and software PREDICTION:

Digital objects such as books, music albums, movies, and software are rapidly distributed as data files through the wireless network, and typically do not have a physical object associated with them.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: The only thing here that has changed in the past decade is how rapidly data files are distributed. But Kurzweil conveniently neglects to specify how rapidly. As this is a very relative term this prediction, no matter how you cut it, was already true in 1999. Oh, and just for the sake of perspective, Napster was released in 1999 as well.

10. Computers | Users’ servers store virtual reality environments PREDICTION:

Most users have servers where they keep digital “objects” such as virtual reality environments (although these are still at an early stage).

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

True True

DISCUSSION: Considering the rise in popularity of the Wii? Alright, fair enough.

11. Computers | Most people prefer to keep their private information under their own control.

PREDICTION:

There are services to keep one’s digital objects in central repositories, but most people prefer to keep their private information under their own physical control.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: Remote backup services were already in existence in the late 90's. Another not so prophetic prophecy. Of note, though is that here's a reverse of Kurzweil's standard.

In his prediction he doesn't say “most users” will use these services, only that they exist, but in his defense he discusses how typical this is. Usually it's the opposite. He'll predict that most users will do something and then defend his prediction by claiming only that that thing exists (consider the defense of predictions 6, 7, 8, 14, and 15).

||

Page | 6

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ 12. Computers | Cables are disappearing PREDICTION:

Cables are disappearing. Communication between components, such as pointing devices, microphones, displays, printers, and the occasional keyboard uses shortdistance wireless technology.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: “Cables are indeed disappearing (the prediction does not say that they have already fully disappeared),� contends Kurzweil. Of course, cables are disappearing and have been slowly since the invention of wireless components. When was that? Was it the release of the wireless keyboard in 1984 (the IBM PCjr)? Or maybe the release of the first wireless computer mouse from Logitech in 1991? Or maybe the first wireless microphone in... the late 1940's? Right.

13. Computers | Computers have wireless Internet connectivity PREDICTION:

Computers routinely include wireless technology to plug into the ever-present worldwide network, providing reliable, instantly available, very high bandwidth communication.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

True True

DISCUSSION: A good prediction. Just for perspective though, bear in mind that it was the mid to late 90's that saw the real development of wifi.

14. Computers | Most text created using speech recognition PREDICTION:

(1) The majority of text is created using continuous speech recognition (CSR) dictation software, but keyboards are still used. (2) CSR is very accurate, far more so than the human transcriptionists who were used up until a few years ago.

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

False False False Probably False

DISCUSSION: 14.1 is clearly false. Not even a substantial portion of all of the text in today's world is created using speech recognition, and almost no speech recognition is

||

Page | 7

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ continuous (more than 30 second runs). In terms of accuracy, 14.2 suggests that by today transcriptionists are less accurate than speech recognition. Yet transcriptionists are still primarily used. Why would this be if they were less accurate and more expensive? It's simple. Even under the most charitable circumstances CSR is more accurate only in terms of conventions (spelling, punctuation, etc). You would never see a transcriptionist mistake “In this dress I'm going to the ball and jumping the first prince I see!” for “In distress I'm going to the balloon, jumping the first prince I see!” (a syntactically correct sentence) but these sorts of errors are still common for speech to text. Also, the larger a vocabulary CSR software has the less accurate it becomes, which is generally not true of transcriptionists.

15. Computers | Language interfaces & animated personalities PREDICTION:

(1) Also ubiquitous are language user interfaces (LUIs), which combine continuous speech recognition (CSR) and natural language understanding (2) For routine matters, such as simple business transactions and information inquiries, LUIs are quite responsive and precise. They tend to be narrowly focused, however, on specific types of tasks. (3) LUIs are frequently combined with animated personalities.

Interacting with an animated personality to conduct a purchase or make a reservation is like talking to a person using videoconferencing, except that the person is simulated.

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

3.

3.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

False False True Already True in 1999 False Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: 15.1 itself has three parts, all of which are false. In Kurzweil's own words, “These capabilities are not yet ubiquitous and probably won’t be over the next few years.”

Now see the previous prediction for a discussion of “continuous speech recognition”. And then consider that the speech recognition most used today (for business transactions, phone support, etc) does not use natural language processing, it generally uses simple keyword recognition, which has been around for decades.

(15.2) Call centers have been using interactive voice response since the 70's, and responsivity and accuracy have been increasing ever since, so broadly speaking this has been around for some time.

Finally, the combination of animated personalities and LUI (15.3) has existed for some time. In fact, let's take the first example Kurzweil lists – Dragon Dictate. Dragon Dictate was released for Windows98 by a company Kurzweil knew very well – Kurzweil Computer Products, Inc. You mean the example he gives as a defense for his 2009

||

Page | 8

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ prediction is a program he knew well that was released a decade earlier? Right. So if broadly by “frequently” we mean “occasionally” (a Kurzweil classic), then this was already true in 1999. Otherwise this is still not the case.

16. Computers | Computer displays have all the qualities of paper PREDICTION:

(1) Computer displays have all the display qualities of paper — high resolution, high contrast, large viewing angle, and no flicker. (2) Books, magazines, and newspapers are now routinely read on displays that are the size of, well, small books.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation:

True True True True

DISCUSSION: A solid prediction.

17. Computers | Computer displays built into eyeglasses PREDICTION:

Computer displays built into eyeglasses are also used.

These specialized glasses allow users to see the normal visual environment, while creating a virtual image that appears to hover in front of the viewer. The virtual images are created by a tiny laser built into the glasses that projects the images directly onto the user’s retinas.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: The type of virtual retinal display to which Kurzweil is referring has been around since the 80's. Vuzix, the company Kurzweil cites, was formed in 1997, buying out Forte Technologies that had spent the 90's producing virtual head mounted displays. Sound familiar?

So if “use” is the only criteria, this has been true for some time, and if commonality is the benchmark then please consider how many people you know who own one of these devices. I live in a relatively tech-savy community and none of my friends personally own computer glasses.

||

Page | 9

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________

18. Computers | Computers include video cameras, face recognition PREDICTION:

(1) Computers routinely include moving picture image cameras and (2) are able to reliably identify their owners from their faces.

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

True Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: This prediction is both a claim about the spread of video cameras and one dealing with facial recognition. 18.1 is essentially correct, though from a broad perspective the first web cams were released in the mid 90's and became increasingly popular towards the end of that decade. As for the ability for computers to recognize human faces? Under the hood, this is still for the most part still-frame face recognition, and computers have been outperforming humans there since the 1960's.

Speaking more to capturing these shots from videos, by the mid 90's software called Mugspot was used in banks, airports, and the like to identify suspect faces, even through facial hair. This is another case where Kurzweil surreptitiously took existing technology and predicted growth, and while true, outside of select niches facial recognition today is not fundamentally different or unbelievably more widespread than it was a decade ago.

19. Computers | 3D chips PREDICTION:

In terms of circuitry, three-dimensional chips are commonly used, and there is a transition taking place from the older single-layer chips.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

True True

DISCUSSION: I could be nitpicky here that the “transition� of which he speaks was already taking place when he made the prediction, but in fairness this was a decent, if not incredibly prophetic, prediction.

||

Page | 10

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________

20. Computers | High-resolution sound anywhere in 3D space PREDICTION:

Sound producing speakers are being replaced with very small chip-based devices that can place high-resolution sound anywhere in three-dimensional space. This technology is based on creating audible frequency sounds from the spectrum created by the interaction of very high frequency tones. As a result, very small speakers can create very robust three-dimensional sound.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

False Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: Want to see incredible rhetoric in action? In his defense of this prediction Kurzweil argues that though his prediction is false there are technologies that do things that he wasn't talking about by using the method he was, providing you liberally interpret his method, and so he was “partially correct”. Even accepting this terrible defense, the technology he's talking about (display point audio, specifically in HyperSonic Sound) was first created in... oh... 1998 (Audio Spotlight). Yup.

21. Computers | $1,000 PC at a trillion calculations per second PREDICTION:

A $1,000 personal computer can perform about a trillion calculations per second.

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

True True

DISCUSSION: A decent prediction based on growth of computing power. Simple extrapolation, but true.

22. Computers | Supercomputers match capacity of human brain PREDICTION:

Supercomputers match at least the hardware capacity of the human brain — 20 million billion calculations per second (20 petaflops).

ACCURACY:

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

||

Page | 11

False False

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ DISCUSSION: To help with this one, I brought on a supposed “expert” - Ray Kurzweil himself. Here you can see the graph that he presents in 2005 clearly showing that strictly speaking he was wrong in his prediction, even given his generous estimate of the computational complexity of the human brain.

Further, to suggest that 20 petaflops is the hardware capacity of the human brain is just a bit optimistically (pessimistically?) low. I turn to another expert, lead cognitive computing research scientist at IBM Dharmendra Modha. The defense department funded multi-million dollar research into reverse engineering the human brain, with Modha at the head. In 2009 (the year in question) he noted that, “We have no computers today that can begin to approach the awesome power of the human mind. A computer comparable to the human brain would need to be able to perform more than 38 thousand trillion operations per second.” And Modha is hardly a pessimist when it comes to those numbers. Many give more conservative estimates. I don't entirely understand how Kurzweil goes from completely wrong to “essentially correct”. Even assuming we are able to have the computational capacity of a human brain in the next 10 years (which may well happen), when you're specifically predicting things 10 years in the future being off by even 5 years is a major mistake.

23. Computers | Virtual parallel supercomputer PREDICTION:

(1) Unused computes on the Internet are being harvested (2) creating virtual parallel supercomputers with human brain hardware capacity.

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

True True False False

DISCUSSION: I almost didn't split this prediction because the import of the whole prediction hinges on the degree to which he envisions it occurring, but in fairness I felt I had to give him 23.1. The rest is clearly false. In his defense of his predictions he lists the

||

Page | 12

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ most powerful distributed computing cluster in the world as being only about 4 petaflops which doesn't even hit his low estimate of the computing power of the brain. It's a shame because had he just been slightly conservative in his prediction it would have been a good one.

24. Computers | Increasing interest in complexity theory computing PREDICTION:

(1) There is increasing interest in massively parallel neural nets, genetic algorithms and other forms of “chaotic� or complexity theory computing, although most computer computations are still done using conventional sequential processing, albeit with some limited parallel processing.

ACCURACY:

1. Strict Interpretation: 1. Broad Interpretation:

Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: Interest in genetic algorithms has been growing since the 60's. The First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms was held in the 80's. Work on the Boltzman Machine was done in the early 80's as well. This is just another prediction that was correct by simple extrapolation of continued interest in an already fruitful field.

25. Computers | Autonomous nanoengineered machines PREDICTION:

(1) Autonomous nanoengineered machines (i.e., machines constructed atom by atom and molecule by molecule) have been demonstrated and include their own computational controls. (2) However, nanoengineering is not yet considered a practical technology.

ACCURACY:

1.

1.

2.

2.

Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation: Strict Interpretation: Broad Interpretation:

False False Already True in 1999 Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: This is a case where Kurzweil just missed the mark. In 2011 a molecular electric car was produced by scientists in the Netherlands. This brilliant little machine had actual wheels the could be made to turn when exposed to electricity, however it was neither autonomous nor did it have its own computational controls (not taking into account that it was also 2 years late). Had Kurzweil omitted autonomous I would have been tempted to give him this prediction in the broader interpretation, but with that in mind, his more conservative second half does deserve a tip of the hat.

||

Page | 13

How Kurzweil's Predictions Are Faring _____________________________________________________________ 26. Computers | Reverse-engineering the human brain PREDICTION:

(1) Research has been initiated on reverse-engineering the human brain through both destructive scans of the brains of recently deceased persons as well as noninvasive scans using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of living persons and animals.

ACCURACY:

1. Strict Interpretation: 1. Broad Interpretation:

True True

DISCUSSION: Can anyone say Blue Brain? Bravo.

Conclusions | Ray Kurzweil is a blowhard techno-soothsayer PREDICTION:

(1) Though both intelligent and technologically well informed, Ray Kurzweil makes few predictions that don't either intentionally or unintentionally use the same rhetorical techniques used by astrologers and mind readers.

ACCURACY:

1. Strict Interpretation: 1. Broad Interpretation:

True Already True in 1999

DISCUSSION: I count only 22% of his predictions that are both true and meaningful in the field he's most known for. I suppose you can draw your own conclusions...

-Reynolds Johnson

||

Page | 14