He was half-wrong about the specific methods used (I say half-wrong because half of AlphaGo relies on relatively-brute-force MCTS). I don't think this detracts from my point - it is hard for any researcher to predict the exact methods that will be used a decade from now.

You don't have a point.

You tried to use one expert as a refutation of my claim that there was a general consensus with how long it would take for computers to beat a human in Go.

A simple search on google will provide you with plenty of writing backing that sentiment up.

Asking any of your friends who took AI classes back then would confirm the same.

Please keep your rant to the other subthread. I was addressing aab0's point.

"I don't think this detracts from my point"

Given your point was a link with an example of one person who believed computers would beat GO you were doing more than that.