Claim and evidence Close ×
Kelly's essay of April 2017 argues that there is no evidence that intelligence is increasing exponentially and that an imagined intelligence explosion should be pictured not as a cascading boom but as a scattering of new varieties, with experiments and the external world limiting the pace of discovery. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2017-04-27 · publication Records dated 2017 → Role Contesting Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Engagement Engages a premise. It disputes the premises that intelligence grows exponentially on a single dimension and that thinking alone, without experiment, yields rapid progress. Scope and limits Read in the author's blog copy; the Wired version of April 2017 was not compared. Kelly states that a singularity is 'greater than zero' in probability but 'highly unlikely'.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
The Myth of a Superhuman AI ↗ The Technium (author's blog, kk.org); also published in Wired, April 2017 (not retrieved) · 2017-04-27
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “Therefore when we imagine an “intelligence explosion,” we should imagine it not as a cascading boom but rather as a scattering exfoliation of new varieties.” Location in source Numbered point 4 of the five assumptions
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Kevin Kelly Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 ab690aebf8528f12b249ba1a5c6ef28a1aa1eec29bdb27b6e287893db80ce8ab). Author's blog copy dated April 27, 2017, retrieved 2026-10-29; the Wired version was not compared. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31; the bytes differ, and the check compared the quoted passages. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Kevin Kelly, “The Myth of a Superhuman AI”, 2017-04-27. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (25 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. Cross-family check item 117: the passage is under point 4. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-31, item 117) re-read the record’s source and found the quotation and stance supported. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
The Myth of a Superhuman AI ↗ The Technium (author's blog, kk.org); also published in Wired, April 2017 (not retrieved) · 2017-04-27
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “There won’t be instant discoveries the minute, hour, day or year a so-called “smarter-than-human” AI appears.” Location in source Section 5, on "thinkism"
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Kevin Kelly Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 ab690aebf8528f12b249ba1a5c6ef28a1aa1eec29bdb27b6e287893db80ce8ab). Author's blog copy dated April 27, 2017, retrieved 2026-10-29; the Wired version was not compared. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31; the bytes differ, and the check compared the quoted passages. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Kevin Kelly, “The Myth of a Superhuman AI”, 2017-04-27. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (16 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-31, item 117) re-read the record’s source and found the quotation and stance supported. No human editorial review. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. A passage of the document disputes the proposition or a premise it depends on. The record documents the text’s position, not who is right.
Date. Date of posting.
Record ID rd-a4-kelly-2017-myth-superhuman-ai