OK, so I started reading the post and initially had the same feeling. May this have been one of those things where he really leaves his pet peeves behind and contributes something?
But then his lingo started to creep in. Computational irreducibility, linking to how he invented the concept. Rurial space. Geez man, does everything really have to be a promotion of the cult-like New Kind of Science stuff? Full of links to his own unrelated blog posts? It's sad.
I'd really have liked to like the article, he clearly put a lot of effort into it. But I had to stop reading. You can't tell for sure where real explainations end and where his unproven claims start about "knowing" that the universe is just computational and everything just based on some rule from a cellular automaton.
And I've gotten conditioned to never start a sentence with "OK, so". It's now giving me the jiffies.
Good luck manufacturing those in a carbon-neutral way.
There are no hacks. We need to stop emitting so much of this stuff.
Who is going to pay for those factories that net-reduce emissions by 1/4? what about pouring those fund into avoiding emissions in the first place, like replacing coal plants with something green or not building new ones or not burning down rain forest or getting people to not commute for 3 hours a day in their SUVs or flying intercontinental for a week of beach holiday?
> They need to be broken up and repurposed to multiple, actually value-creating companies.
These obviously can't both be true. You need to take your pick of what you critizice.