Lol exactly. He can't "grock" the difference between speculation and fact. He doesn't seem to understand social norms or be able to understand basic social cues. He either doesn't read comments closely or has a a reading disability or doesn't know the recent history of some very basic A.I. (self driving cars). He often seems unable to distinguish between criticism of his manner and the material he is presenting (as if the material and his behavior are the same thing. Taking criticisms of his behavior as disagreement with the matetial). He is a super strange person who seem to either have a screw loose or is lingering on the far edge of the functional spectrum. Hubski's A.I. Pope is super bizarre.
There are a handful of hubskiers I know of, myself included, who have done/are doing real AI work. I've been trying to ignore this dude's threads, but I'll point out that everyone else I know of who knows their shit hasn't bothered to comment in them either. Real-world AI is mostly boring, because things you can automate are always boring. PROFOUND/SCARY AI THING articles are always more science fiction than science.
You know it's quite hilarious -- my facebook friends (and I only have a few hundred, my actual friends) include Oren Etzioni and Ben Goertzal and Roman Yampolskiy and Toby Walsh and Sebastian Thrun and Rob Enderle and many others -- it's you who have your heads on backwards. I humbly suggest you rethink your position -- it's really not going to work any more.
Elaborating now that I'm not half-asleep, AI algorithms are either automating logical inference or automating statistical inference or a mixture. You can call a spam filter AI if you want and no one will call you on it, but it's just boring old hypothesis testing if you do what it does with pencil and paper. Likewise self-driving cars aren't different in kind from missile guidance systems, they can just do more because we have better computers. AI is more who you studied with, how you want to think about the problems you're solving and, less benignly, how the marketing people want to talk about the problems you're solving than a distinct kind of technology.
I'm not entirely sure how to answer that, but if you wikipedia Kalman Filter and follow along you're a couple of months from following Sebastien Thrun's book and the rest depends on which side of the "DARPA got us this far" and "google has hookers and blow" you fall on.