This isn't a formal debate, and authority is useful especially as a "first pass" filter, or in terms of establishing Bayesian priors. The key, IMO, is not to assume that the mere existence of authority guarantees that someone is right. But in either case, it's certainly valid to ask the question "why should I take Kevin Kelly seriously on this topic?"

I don't agree in this context. The author wrote an entire article about his position, and dismissing it entirely because some "luminary" disagrees is not an interesting response.

OP didn't even bother to point out how or why Kurzweil purportedly disagrees.

I thought it was obvious. Clearly it was not. Ray Kurzweil is a futurist who has spent multiple decades researching this topic and has written multiple books on it. His bio speaks for itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil

I guess I interpreted tech-historian's post a little differently than you.

Likewise, I don't support dismissing Kelly's article out-of-hand, based on Kurzweil's position. But I do think it's fair to raise the issue in terms of "why should one take Kevin Kelly seriously on this?"