Yep. This is not a strong proof that humans are simulable, and I don't intend it to be. And I don't meant to suggest that simulating a human particle for partic

Yep. This is not a strong proof that humans are simulable, and I don't intend it to be. And I don't meant to suggest that simulating a human particle for particle will ever be an efficient way to model human behavior. I suspect that even medium fidelity neural simulations will someday be sufficient. Instead, the list is meant to inspire an engagement at the level of: "which of these assumptions do I disbelieve?" For it to be the case that computers cannot mimic human-level intelligence, at least one of these items have to be false. And I consider the last one to be the weakest to attack, because all you're really saying there is that it will never be practical, not that it will never be possible. I think disbelieving any of the other assumptions makes a stronger statement, but I also think they are the harder ones to disbelieve.