Tag: Kurzweil Scorecard
-
Nine of ten plasticity findings Kurzweil cited in 2005 held up. The reverse-engineering synthesis they were supposed to enable did not.
-
Kurzweil’s 2005 brain-scanning scouting report named specific labs. The milestones mostly arrived — through different teams entirely.
-
Kurzweil’s 2005 neuroscience facts held up. His fMRI and MEG specs got beaten — by instruments he didn’t name.
-
Nine of ten neuroscience claims from 2005 held up. The tenth — brain scanning doubling yearly — hit the physics of blood flow and skulls, and Kurzweil concedes it in the 2024 book.
-
Nine of ten nanotech milestones Kurzweil cited in 2005 were real. Almost none reached a product through the mechanism he named.
-
Kurzweil forecast diamondoid respirocytes in bloodstreams by the 2020s. What arrived instead is a 1.8-millimeter magnetic microrobot entering human trials in 2026 — right direction, wrong scale by three orders of magnitude.
-
The 2005 genetics chapter got the timelines mostly right. It got the machines, companies, and methods mostly wrong.
-
Of ten nanotech-for-the-environment predictions from 2005, the one with no named material — better lighting saving 200 Mt CO2/year — blew past its number by 2x. Almost every specific mechanism stayed in the lab.
-
Kurzweil bet on hydrogen cars, microbial cells, and sonofusion in 2005. Silicon photovoltaics quietly won everything.
-
Kurzweil bet on methanol laptops and coal with sequestration; lithium-ion won, FutureGen died, and the distributed fuel cell is booming — just inside AI data centers.