It's a good post but for some reason he decided to end it with a random attack on Paul Graham, which seems weird. It's not really necessary to say this and actually the accusation is slightly ridiculous (how does he know how bright Paul Graham thinks Paul Graham is?). Not good judgment to include this in the post, and undermines the rest of it for me a bit.
Agreed. Also citing Graham's "lack of experience in this area".
Even in the steelman case of the Hollywood celebrity promoting a cause they are clearly not qualified to evaluate, I think we ought not belittle the speech act itself. Better to just present your counter-arguments if you disagree.
If everyone felt free to share their opinions, the better the quantity and quality of ideas that surface after due examination.
