Why should LLMs be review-only if they already beat average human reviewers?
andrewgwils · x · 2026-07-27
The author argues against a world where LLMs are used only for review, even if they are better than the average human reviewer, and asks who that research is actually for.
More from AGI Musings
- AlphaGo is used as a case study for how superhuman AI can still improve humans — _arohan_ · 2026-07-27
- Open-weight AI will be used for harm, says quote-tweet arguing bad actors always adapt — basedjensen · 2026-07-27
- ARC-AGI’s name may overstate what the benchmark can really tell us about AGI — tedgreenwald · 2026-07-27
- Joshua Saxe says a near-term international AI safety deal still looks hard as cyber risk rises — joshua_saxe · 2026-07-27
- Open weights may lag frontier AI by 3–12 months, but still act as a sovereign fallback — robleclerc · 2026-07-27
- AI may erode open source’s classic security advantage, according to a Linus’s law rethink — BlackHC · 2026-07-27