The main claim here, that Eliezer is demonstrably wrong about these claims made, is nowhere near backed up by the arguments.
I am not argueing you should agree with Eliezer (and I at least confidently disagree with #3), but to say that you’ve “demonstrated” that he is wrong is just overselling your post unacceptably, imo.
In your analysis of the 3 claims made, you haven’t shown any claims that Yudkowsky made that you can actually verify to us beyond a reasonable doubt are false. This is what it would need for you to say that his claims are demonstrably false.
Im not saying you should prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his claims are false, you should just change the title and introduction to something far more humble.
The main claim here, that Eliezer is demonstrably wrong about these claims made, is nowhere near backed up by the arguments.
I am not argueing you should agree with Eliezer (and I at least confidently disagree with #3), but to say that you’ve “demonstrated” that he is wrong is just overselling your post unacceptably, imo.
In your analysis of the 3 claims made, you haven’t shown any claims that Yudkowsky made that you can actually verify to us beyond a reasonable doubt are false. This is what it would need for you to say that his claims are demonstrably false.
Im not saying you should prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his claims are false, you should just change the title and introduction to something far more humble.