How Ray Kurzweil Plans To Revolutionize Search At Google • Hacker News Board

Re: How Ray Kurzweil Plans To Revolutionize Search At Google

#111

Post by coldtea » Sun, May 05, 2013, 7:02 PM UTC

J_ wrote: post #104

coldtea wrote: post #45

> How Ray Kurzweil Plans To Revolutionize Search At Google By rigorous hand-waving, as he mostly does things the last 1-2 decades?

Haters gonna hate. Larry Page obviously didn't hire him and let him take up Google's resources for his "rigorous hand-waving". How does this one-liner contribute to the conversation at all? Your negativity is unenlightening and obnoxious.

>Haters gonna hate. Larry Page obviously didn't hire him and let him take up Google's resources for his "rigorous hand-waving".

No, he did it to get some PR of Google as a mad-genius storage. He also did it with tons of other semi-retired Comp Sci legends. He might also like the guy, or believe the Singularity mambo-jambo himself.

There's a line going around about Google being where "old computer scientists go to retire".

>How does this one-liner contribute to the conversation at all?

By giving a summary of the whole thing? A very succinct one at that? If it's also accurate (which you can argue about), then it's a perfect contribution to the conversation.

Re: How Ray Kurzweil Plans To Revolutionize Search At Google

#112

Post by J_ » Sun, May 05, 2013, 8:32 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #111

J_ wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haters gonna hate. Larry Page obviously didn't hire him and let him take up Google's resources for his "rigorous hand-waving". How does this one-liner contribute to the conversation at all? Your negativity is unenlightening and obnoxious.

> Haters gonna hate. Larry Page obviously didn't hire him and let him take up Google's resources for his "rigorous hand-waving". No, he did it to get some PR of Google as a mad-genius storage. He also did it with tons of other semi-retired Comp Sci legends. He might also like the guy, or believe the Singularity mambo-jambo himself. There's a line going around about Google being where "old computer scientists go to re…

It's still a shitty thing to say. Why do you think he's set to accomplish nothing but get PR for Google? Because he's old?

The guy isn't an idiot, and has managed technical teams his entire life.

Re: How Ray Kurzweil Plans To Revolutionize Search At Google

#113

Post by [deleted] » Sun, May 05, 2013, 9:57 PM UTC

esahione wrote: post #37

coldtea wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I don't think so. For one, Kurzweill DOES have "grand" ideas. Extravagant visions of a future with technological immortality, singularity, etc. Hofstadter does not. He merely examines some things, like cognition, and proposes some theories about their workings. Like, you know, every scientist. Kurzweill comes out as grandioze, obsessive and deluded, Hofstadter like a normal writer, no more or less strange tha…

Except that Hofstadter, other than writing about his ideas and theories, has accomplished jack shit. Pragmatically speaking, Kurzweil is miles ahead of Hofstadter in terms of putting his theories and ideas to practice. It's very easy to criticize visionaries, until they achieve something. Then nobody holds the critics accountable for their negative attitudes towards the visions, and the critics probably would claim t…

[deleted]

Re: How Ray Kurzweil Plans To Revolutionize Search At Google

#114

Post by DanBC » Mon, May 06, 2013, 9:44 AM UTC

OGinparadise wrote: post #62

DanBC wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google better be really careful because Sadly, you are in a minority. Google's results are excellent for most people. I used to use + often. We know that the + operator was rarely used, and most of those times it wasn't used correctly. (Of all searches, only 1 in 600 were correctly using the + operator.) Being outside Google (and not able to see their data) is frustrating, but they have a lot of numbers and they do…

>> Sadly, you are in a minority. Google's results are excellent for most people. Sadly, you are in a minority. Bing's results are excellent for most people. Slap a Google logo and I'm willing to bet that most people wouldn't tell the difference. It's the Google brand that is golden, at least so far. But lately people are talking and questioning their honesty.

Well, you missed the point widely.

In my sentence "Google's results are excellent for most people." I could have said "Modern web search engine results are excellent for most people" - I didn't because this is a discussion of how Google (and only Google) is failing for a number of people.