Frogboy, you may very well be correct about that, at least up to a point. That is what the singularity that Kurzweil talked about, our own capabilities being expanded upon and eventually becoming more than just "meat". Which.. A lot of us are more than that now days anyway. I know of several people of which you'd find it hard to describe where they end and their technology begins.
Now that I think about it, as an AI programmer you should have some sort of opinion on this question I've had for some time now.. What happens to gamers, and gaming in general when you get to the point of Grand Theft Auto 15, or whichever number comes with advances in quantum computing that allows for.. Well, digital beings to be "born" into? Where the everyday person on the street in the game actually has a life that they actually remember, have feelings about, jobs that they are going to, worries about bills being paid and.. The player runs them over trying to chase down their target. What are the actual implications of such things? Will it change what it means to be human? What it means to be a living entity? Are we mature enough as a society to even ponder this question, let alone answer it?
When everything of who you are as a person can be recreated, "simulated".. At that point you can achieve a paradox by asking a very simple question: who are you? Which one is the real one? Is that even a valid question? I'm puzzled, but that is my nature. I do not think being who we are means what we think it means. I wonder if a PETA-like group would form for digital entities. Though, that isn't a very apt description of what they would really be, we're all the same at the very base, amorphous energy given form. Our thoughts are just as electrical as theirs would be.
Hm, just a thought.
Lots of good points there and you're right, the concept of AI is going to get very very murky in a few years and I was really sloppy in my use of the term strong AI.
When I use the term, Strong AI, I am really talking about an AI that is truly artificial (i.e. not modeled on our own intelligence). That is the type of AI that I am skeptical occurring. I know that Kurzweil believe this is inevitable but just like he (and I for that matter) believe that gene therapy is going to have a short life-span, I believe that artificial intelligence engines are going to have a short life-span.
It's sort of like robots. There are lots of people who imagine the future is going to be filled with intelligent robots. I don't see this happening at all. I think our technological progress is becoming so rapid that we'll bypass robots as a solution to things just like we'll bypass long-term genetic therapy and long-term moving human biologics around the solar system.
Instead, we'll simply keep extending more and more of "us" into "the cloud". It won't happen overnight. I don't think we'll be doing any sort of intrusive inorganic conversion (i.e. I don't see us becoming Borg-like). Eventually (and by eventually I really mean 25 years from now) most of what makes "us" us will be in the cloud at which point you could argue that this enhanced version of us is in effect, "AI" because we'll have vastly expanded our intelligence using artificial means.
I realize when we look at a fixed point in time -- 2013 -- what I say above may seem absurd to some. But, then again, someone in 1813 would think the future we live in today would have been an absurd scenario. We already are using artificial means to greatly expand our individual capabilities.
In 1813, homes were primarily lit with candles (if you were rich, most people, if they lit their homes, did so with animal fat and other rather smelly stuff). Furniture, such as it was, was kept up against walls. The idea of having furniture in the middle of the room would be ridiculous (you'd trip on it in the dark all the time). It wouldn't be until Whale Oil became popular that lamps would start to become a solution (again for the rich) which led to kerosene and then gas and of course electrical lighting.
Today, in 2013, I can, from my person, turn on and off the steady, perfect, illumination in my home from across the world. I get control the temperature of my home from across the world. I can "command" my home to play movies on the television for guests even if I'm not at home (mind you, in 1813, the equivalent entertainment would be going to the theater to watch a live performance). Point being in 2013, an individual can command light, heat, cool, entertainment and more via their constructs (their tiny machines) from anywhere in the world.
None of the above scenario required me to insert wires or electrodes into my body. 
And I want to emphasize this: The pace of this progress is accelerating exponentially. That's why so many people have a rough time realizing that our dreams of a Star Trek future or one of robots or even a future where we're all genetically modified super beings will never come to pass because technology will outpace them. They'll never have a chance to really get going. We'll still have some of this stuff but they'll go the way of the telegraph except unlike the telegraph which lasted many decades, the things I mention above many only get a few years of spotlight before being passed on by.
In the time that this forum is likely to still exist, I predict (And we can refer back to this in another 10 years) that 10 years from now (and this forum is 12 years old already) that the idea of sending biological human beings to Mars will seem ridiculous to a lot of people, if not most people.
One more personal example of how our individual capabilities, enhanced via our machines, is trumping our "meat". As some of you know, I'm an amateur astronomer. I've spent many thousands of dollars over the years on telescopes. I still, for the kids and such, will haul out one of my smaller ones to show them Jupiter or Saturn. But that's about it. Why? Because today, I can simply take control of a robotic telescope in an observatory somewhere in the world (like the Canary Islands) and look at the sky with that. Why would I futz with a 14 inch telescope (if you've ever used a large non-permanent positioned telescope you know what I mean) when I can "see" the same thing with a much better telescope?
And we're just beginning. Aug Glasses are coming (Google glass being a primitive example), Aug Chairs an when they figure out how to connect our "meat" inputs to the cloud in a way that is culturally acceptable, we'll have Aug us and at that point, the singularity will be upon us.
