^ And the last two times you "countered" it on this board by either ignoring it and continuing to speculate on how exponential growth would effect technology, or you changed the subject to something else entirely.
The possibility of a point of "diminishing returns" is really a dash of cold water on the very CONCEPT of "singularity theory." It posits the very strong likelihood that we will eventually reach a point where computer technology cannot be improved any further, where AIs cannot get any smarter, microchips can't get any smaller or faster, and brain-machine/body integration cannot get any smoother or any less awkward without massive expenditures for very little gain. At that point, what appear to be exponentially growing technologies crystallize into things that remain relatively unchanged for thousands of years and whatever we have working at that point is what we're stuck with for the long term.
Do you allow for that in your predictions, or do you simply wish it away and go on imagining?
Actually I directly countered it, as far back as before this thread started, on other threads. I did it first on the origins of science fiction "firsts" thread that I started. I still stand by it and see nothing new to change my mind on it.