Used to be an Anti-Singularity argument (Score 1)

While Kurzweil, in his Singularity is near, showed to some extend that nearly all information-related technology increases exponentially (via S-curve parts for each
new major paradigm), opponents ridiculed that generalization of Moore's Law by
arguing that razors' blades, modern razor designs made by computers, won't grow
exponentially to thousands of blades by 2020.

IMO that's short sighted: even with razors it very well might (though far from
as hard as Moore's Law growth and things depending on that): the paradigm of 'what
constitutes a razor' just has to change. But why shouldn't it actually happen that way?

Ironically, We could see manual razors with nanowire/microcavity-like structures,
or just shrinking, ever more precise razor blades with tiny strengthening parallel
interconnections, or whatever, until we have razors that are simple Micromechanical
Systems or nanorazors, with growing miniaturization technology this may be
economical and possible as a trend.