* “Chess results are not 50-50” - I don’t think the exact numbers are that important. What’s important is that in the 50-50 model or x-y model the Aliens assume these values to be just a consistent result of an RNG.
* “Chess is not random / the players are intelligent / the aliens could investigate who plays against who” - In the parable the Aliens don’t have direct access these variables, just like we might not have the access to some variables in QM experiments and we (and They) could mistake something hard to observe for random (i.e. if the rule is “if there’s an even number of atoms in a 1m radius, do A, if it’s odd, do B” the outcome would be 50-50 and would seem random even if it’s not)
* “Theories that are more complicated, predict less or make worse approximations are worth less than simple theories that predict more / better” (in other words Science is about models and approximations, not about truth or “Shut up and calculate”) - I think the author simply disagrees but he also shows why non-mainstream models are worth pursuing and developing - so that we are not stuck in a local maximum with a worse model than the one we could have.
Something else concerns me: I don’t know much about QM but if I understand correctly, Bell’s inequality tells us that there are no “hidden variables” and that QM is indeed random.
I’d be grateful for any references to articles on this topic that can be understood by non-experts.