Well put. IMO a person's opinion of Watson's intelligence will likely correspond to their reaction to Singularity. If someone is looking for an essence to intelligence that separates Watson from us, then it is likely they will not be willing to follow the conceptual course that leads us to Singularity. However, if one is willing to accept that there is no difference between intelligence and the imitation of intelligence, then understanding Singularity requires only that you follow the facts as they stand. The human mind is a construct. It is a learning machine. It is not intelligent, but acts intelligently. Because we percieve intelligent actions, we infer that the brain contains something intelligent. It does not. It reacts to its environment, and to internal models of its environment. Intelligence resides in action, not in the brain. The Singularity is the result of artificial entities that act in ways that we perceive as intelligent, at least for a short while. These entities then evolve to act on perceptions and internal models that we cannot understand. It is not necessary to acheive human-like intelligence to bring about Singularity. It is only necessary to create a learning machine with a potential that is greater than our own. I agree that the reaction to Singularity that many have is often irrational and fear-driven. It's understandable. It terrifies me. However, that does not make it any less likely.A word on the nature of Watson’s “understanding” is in order here. A lot has been written that Watson works through statistical knowledge rather than “true” understanding. Many readers interpret this to mean that Watson is merely gathering statistics on word sequences. The term “statistical information” in the case of Watson refers to distributed coefficients in self-organizing methods such as Markov models. One could just as easily refer to the distributed neurotransmitter concentrations in the human cortex as “statistical information.” Indeed, we resolve ambiguities in much the same way that Watson does by considering the likelihood of different interpretations of a phrase.