Blake Staceyblake-stacey

I'm happy to see that the bibliography I compiled for [arXiv:1703.07901][1] is becoming more and more out of date!

[1]: https://scirate.com/arxiv/1703.07901

Reference 2, which is used to define QBism, is to Caves, Fuchs and Schack (2002). This is an incorrect attribution; Caves does not call himself a QBist and disagrees with some turns that the other two authors made in the following years. (One might call it a "Quantum Bayesian"
paper, that term being older and more general, encompassing some writings of Bub and Pitowsky and even old Usenet posts of John Baez, for example. The more specific term hit the arXiv in 2010.) The canonical conceptual statement of QBism is Fuchs, Mermin and Schack (2014). What that article says about Wigner's Friend applies to Frauchiger--Renner and all the other recent variations.

Podolsky is like banana: One knows how to spell it, but one does not know how to stop.

There is a more recent article by Appleby, following up on the one that is Ref. 1 in your paper, which may be pertinent: arXiv:1602.09002.

I loved the remark that "Heisenberg in his later years expresses his appreciation of the mathematical side by claiming that it was his own work in the first place."

Subtle typo on page 3: "but new very little about matrices". And another on page 16: "change slowly in phases space". Also, "property-defined" should be "properly-defined", I think, though one connotation of classical is often having fully-defined intrinsic properties. Page 25: "a projective measurements". Page 31: "Poppers" should be "Popper's".