As far as I can tell there is no link to this tweet in this post which is bad form to say the list. The post has multiple links promoting author's other posts, but not to the raison d'etre for this post.
Clarification: The post does link to a Tumbler post which one might infer had been mentioned in the tweet, but without a link to said tweet, it's odd. It is common to give credit to the work that led to one's discovery of related work.
PS: Apparently, the author is Director of Research, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge which makes this lack of proper citation even more perplexing.
PPS: Compare the intro paragraph of this post to one that properly cites related work[1] with actual links to the referenced works:
>> Yesterday I came a across a new (new to me, that is) proof of the irrationality of \sqrt{2}. I found it in the paper “Irrationality From The Book,” by Steven J. Miller, David Montague, which was recently posted to arXiv.org.
PPPS: It is especially ironic that the author has also wrote this at some point[2]:
>>> Many people write their related work section in a wholly passive mockery of English, never mentioning the names of their colleagues: ... It’s discourteous and reads badly. Reference numbers are not names, so why do you keep forcing your reader to look them up in the bibliography? The direct way is also clearer: ...
[1]: https://divisbyzero.com/2009/10/06/tennenbaums-proof-of-the-...