Patri Friedman

Actually, if you look at my writing, I generally defended the big platforms before reading Jaron's work and didn't think at all about the data labor issues. So yes, we now agree, but because he persuaded me on this and many other issues, like UBI

If he persuaded you on many issues, it is even less surprising or objective for him to laud you as a future genius. (I am not meaning to criticize your work w/ this perspective, it sounds fresh & interesting. My criticism is for the hollow accolade).

Sorry, so you are saying you should never be influenced by someone you think is brilliant? Anyone who accepts relativity shouldn't praise Einstein? All those relativity haters are the only credible sources?

More generally, my problem is with someone like Jaron making an objective-sounding endorsement of scientific quality, that is actually a signal of affiliation and a hope that his values triumph. You should seek praise for your ideas' merit, not their apparent politics.

But you just said that in economics there is no distinction

Sigh. I said economics is less rigorous & more politicized than general relativity. That is not equivalent to saying economics has NO distinction between merit and politics. A clear mind would never make that foolish leap, so look to your memetic defenses - they've been breached.

I am just confused by the nature of the argument you are making. How is it illegitimate for me to think Jaron is brilliant and have been persuaded by his brilliance to agree with him on something? How could it be otherwise?

Put another way, if he were forced to bet half his net worth on a prediction market on the probability that "Glen Weyl is the person whose ideas will shape the next 25 years", I think he would give it < 5% probability (perhaps < 1%). It's his hope, not his belief.