AI@50 

Thanks for the message on my Talk page.  No harm done, as I was offline of WP briefly at the time myself  and I learned a lot in the process of restoring and improving the article to WP Notability standards, a lesson I've applied elsewhere.  I also learned more about the WP distinction between Primary and Secondary sources.  The result is all to the good. I'll take your word that the oldprodfull  template is a good thing, though I think on first sight that the template's terse wording  "This article was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past"   could be clearer as to its intent: does this really suffice to, in your words, "let future editors know that the article has already been through the proposed deletion process once and is no longer eligible for deletion without a proper discussion or other reason"?  I hope so, though it was not obvious to me: it reads more like an invitation to agree or disagree to deletion and so reprise the issue.  If you can see it that way, as a relatively novice editor might, perhaps the oldprodfull template could be expanded to that effect, with some procedural directives and relevant links, to the original PROD and the policy guidelines for continuance.  I defer to your experience and good judgment. 

BTW, since you liked Kurzweil's other book, The Singularity is Near is certainly worth a skim  Moore's Law on steroids  a fascinating perspective, from AI's greatest optimist. 

Thanks again, Atama, and welcome back!