AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space to SneerClub@awful.systems · 3 months agoWe regret to inform you that Ray Kurzweil is back on his bullshitwww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square370fedilinkarrow-up172arrow-down12
arrow-up170arrow-down1external-linkWe regret to inform you that Ray Kurzweil is back on his bullshitwww.theguardian.comAllNewTypeFace@leminal.space to SneerClub@awful.systems · 3 months agomessage-square370fedilink
minus-squareAmoeba_Girl@awful.systemslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up22arrow-down1·3 months agoAbsolutely amazing post, thank you so much. So that’s one correct prediction and nine on a spectrum from wrong to meaningless!
minus-squareVaryklinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-23 months agoNot even close. Those 10 predictions are correct with zero proofs against their claims so far. It seems like counting is hard for you. Oh! I see your issue. The “0” next to the"1" actually makes the number “ten”, not just “1+0” like you’re assuming. Numbers, right? I’d love to see you disprove these. Every other comment has failed so far, but I’m sure you’ll do great.
Absolutely amazing post, thank you so much. So that’s one correct prediction and nine on a spectrum from wrong to meaningless!
Not even close.
Those 10 predictions are correct with zero proofs against their claims so far.
It seems like counting is hard for you.
Oh! I see your issue. The “0” next to the"1" actually makes the number “ten”, not just “1+0” like you’re assuming. Numbers, right?
I’d love to see you disprove these. Every other comment has failed so far, but I’m sure you’ll do great.