Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're describing a long term view (singularity?) rather than the up-and-coming technology in the question. Claiming to be 100% right and calling people with different opinion idiots might have added a downvote or two (Personally I upvoted).
I don't think it's a long-term view due to the numbers involved. For example, everyday developers might have access to 64-bit laptop computer with 4 cores @ 4 ghz and 16 GB of RAM (literally millions of people use such a machine, zero exaggeration). When working on their own desktops, AI researches might use an 6-core or 8-core desktop with 64 GB of RAM or, rarely, 128 GB of RAM. Access to 2-32 terabytes of RAM are n…
First of all, the current state of AI and machine learning seems to be abysmal. The major breakthroughs (such as backpropagation) were made decades ago. The only reason that AI seems to be improving, is that a couple of companies are throwing an immense amount of money, data, and computing power into it. Even then, the results are relatively poor at best: systems like Google Now and Siri can only respond to a limited set of hardcoded queries and every kind of "suggestion" system seems to be actually getting worse in the last few years.
Secondly, Moore's law is as good as dead. If an algorithm requires a terabyte of ram, it is all but useless for most practical purposes. I'm currently looking for a replacement of a 5-year old laptop and the newest model is at most 20% faster, with the same amount of memory! Heck, last time I got a desktop it had an AMD Phenom II X6 1055T: for the same amount of money, you'd now get an i5 8500 or a Ryzen 5 1600x. The performance gain? Well judging by the Passmark scores, it would be a jump from ~5000 to ~13000. So that's roughly 2.5 times as fast in eight years, with a jump from 45nm to 14nm. Memory progression is about the same. Considering that the progression is slowing down, it'll take quite a few decades before the performance required for current AI is generally available.
Thirdly, the stuff which is impersonating AI isn't actually intelligent. Every current solution focuses on what basically boils down to a very complex set of linear regressions and similar methods. There is no adaptability, no sense of context, not even the slightest form of creativity. Everything which we consider to be intelligence is lacking. This isn't really a big surprise, because we simply don't know how it works in living creatures. Sure, we know how the neurons work, but the high-level understanding is lacking, so how could we even begin to imitate it or even improve on it? Sure, we could try simulating an actual brain, but a Blue Gene/L can only simulate half of a mouse's brain at one-tenth of the speed - and that's assuming the simulation is actually correctly modelling the biology.
So no, I don't think we're on the brink of an AI revolution. We might have something with the intelligence of a service dog in a decade or three, but even that would probably be a stretch. Unless a few very major breakthroughs occur, AI is going to be a bit of a disappointment.