1/2 I think the statement is a stretch, at best, and exactly the broader phenomenon Judea was trying to point out. Using the words "causal" or being connected with causality does not help to push the science of causal inference. RL folks are decades doing what they are doing... https://twitter.com/roydanroy/status/1264321091310432259

2/2 ...without even mentioning the term. How so? Going towards a more accurate/fairer statement. Are RL & Causality related? Yes (there are maybe 5-10 papers in the world related to this point, no mas). Are they the same? No. Are RL folks trained in basic causal inference? No.

3/3 Are some of them interested? Yes. Are CI folks interested in RL? Yes. Are there significant problems at the intersection of Causal+RL? Many. Judeas goal was to avoid cheap/opportunistic shots & try to raise awareness that basic CI research hasn't been funded. Hope this helps.