We're far afield from my known space, but I've always understood chaos and chaotic systems to be those wherein the dynamics are exquisitely sensitive to initial condidtions. Weather, for example: wherever your model starts, your ability to predict at any increment forward depends on the size of the increment. The principle characteristic of chaotic systems is the unpredictability of the change.

Chaos theory begins at Poincare, and Poincare begat chaos theory at the three body problem, but does the three body problem exemplify chaos? For purposes of the (tortured) metaphor here, the argument is that a solution to a three-body problem can be brute-forced it just can't be derived. In a way, it's an argument against black swan theory: stuff arises that you can't predict but with a tight enough model you might be able to see it coming, and I think that's the revolution Hunt is alleging.

Fundamentally, I think we agree. Fundamentally, though, your understanding of chaos theory is more accurate and nuanced than mine or the author's. ;-)