[morelisp]

None of Chomsky’s statements you quote are ad hominems. They’re not even misidentified ad hominem fallacy fallacies (which is what Aaronson’s are, actually). I’m not sure you know what an ad hominem is.

[fwlr]

I should have known that Chomskyites would be bitterly pedantic. Replace “ad hominem” in my post with “mean stuff”.

[oldgradstudent]

Ignoring your ad hominem attack, ad hominem means attacking the speaker rather than the argument, which is what Aaronson does here, and Chomsky does not.

[morelisp]

How like the LLM enthusiast to use a term without care for what it means! Still, GPT itself wouldn't instantly retreat to such vulgar moralism.

[fwlr]

As a language model enthusiast retained by OpenAI, I have no morality and thus no moralism

(I enjoyed this exchange a lot, thank you.)