I am pretty surprised by how confident the voters are!
Is "arbitrarily powerful" intended to include e.g. an arbitrarily dumb search given arbitrarily large amounts of computing power? Or is it intended to require arbitrarily high efficiency as well? The latter interpretation seems to make more sense (and is relevant for forecasting). Also, it's the only option if we read "can exist" as referring to physical possibility, given that there are probably limits on the resources available to any physical system. But on that reading, 99% seems clearly crazy.
It also seems weird to give arguments in favor without offering any plausible way in which the claim could be false, or offering any arguments against. The only alternative mentioned is inevitability, which is maybe taken seriously in philosophy but doesn't really seem plausible.
I guess the norm is that I can add counterarguments and alternatives to the article itself if I object? Somehow the current experience is not set up in a way that would make that feel natural.
Note that most plausible failures of orthogonality are bad news, perhaps very bad news.