In a debate, which is what was supposed to be happening, the point is to make claims that either support or refute the central claim. That’s what Holly was pointing out—this is a fundamental requirement for accepting Nora’s position. (I don’t think that this is the only crux—“AI Safety is gonna be easy” and “AI is fully understandable” are two far larger cruxes, but they largely depend on this first one.)
In a debate, which is what was supposed to be happening, the point is to make claims that either support or refute the central claim. That’s what Holly was pointing out—this is a fundamental requirement for accepting Nora’s position. (I don’t think that this is the only crux—“AI Safety is gonna be easy” and “AI is fully understandable” are two far larger cruxes, but they largely depend on this first one.)