Sven Groot wrote:
Perfect machine translation. Currently automatic translation is laughably bad even on the most ideal inputs. Spoken text is often ungrammatical and contains colloquialisms and expressions. A machine translator must have an extreme amount of real-world knowledge
to recognize these and map them into another language. We're not even close on this one. Personally I believe that unless we can create a functioning replica of the human brain the amount of data and the type or reasoning needed to really do this without
lots of mistakes will make this impossible. This will take 50-100 years at least, if ever. IMO, of course.
I'm not dismissing all of your points, but this one stand out for me for some very personal reasons. See, when I was a Freshman in College we had one of the pioneers of Computer Science who happened to be an alumn of our school come and give a very fascinating
class room lecture. This man was smart to the point of being scary, and had vast knowledge on a lot of subjects. One subject he was very knowledgeable in because of a handicapped sister who could benefit from the technology was speach recognition. He was
aware of all sorts of research being done on the topic, and he was convinced that we'd have functioning software but it would take 25-50 years. In fact, one of the commercial uses for it he was convinced would be replacing telephone operators. We all walked
out of the lecture and thought he was nuts for predicting this would be within 25-50 years.
Four years later, while I was a Senior, AT&T was replacing operators in Fla. with a new computer system that employed speach recognition.
I now hear predictions like this, and always think to myself "divide the lowest estimate by 5", and you know what? That often turns out to be an accurate estimate!