I would guess they heard about it. maybe read a wiki article sometime, and that's all. Link a statement by either where they post about AI having a limitation? What else they have? I only see handwaving, mosty indicative of them not really even knowing the words they use. If they had degrees I would have to assume they probably, sometime in the past, have passed an exam (which is not a good evidence of competence either, but at least is something).

edit: To clarify. I do not refer to "research associates", see grandchild post.

Speaking of which, a couple days ago I noticed that a technobabble justification of atheism because theism fails "Solomonoff induction" which I seen before and determined to be complete idiocy (I am an atheist too) is by same Luke as at SIAI. Not only he doesn't know what Solomonoff induction is, he also lacks the wits to know he doesn't know.

He heard about it though, and uses it as technobabble slighty better than script writers would. Ultimately, SIAI people are very talented technobabble generators and that seem to be the extent of it. I'm not giving a slightest benefit of the doubt if I see that people do make technobabble. (I used to give in the past, which resulted in me reading sense into nonsense; because of ambiguity of human language, you can form sentences such that the statement is actually generated when one is reading your sentence, and you can do that without actually generating that statement yourself).

If you want to change my view, you better actually link some posts that are evidence for them knowing something instead of calling what i say a 'rant'.