Word, thanks for the input, I'm gonna snoop around some more, it seems interesting so far. This is that thing that both kooks and straight up masters of their craft have in common, so it can get confusing at times. They weren't criticisms that I want to keep standing behind, I'd rather get at the underlying ideas. More so just general first impressions that left me wanting to double check I'm not just browsing the blog posts of some rationality charlatan. I adhere to some ideologies myself, but I try to keep them in check. His claims about his version of reasoning supplanting Popper's falsifiability, however, that's some bombastic stuff I want to get in to and see some responses. Philosophy of Science can be a nebulous thing sometimes, but them's fightin words.Yudkowsky has not always got a handle on whether people are picking up what he's putting down.
(1) and (2) are very good "criticisms."