The AI vs human science debate hinges on base rates of slop on each side
RexDouglass · x · 2026-11-14
The author argues the AI-vs-human-science debate turns on what you think the base rates of slop are in each camp and how they'll change. Cheerleaders wildly underestimate rates of human slop while overestimating AI's improvement. Like driving, AI is already safer because humans are just so bad.
Related event: Debate: AI Research Slop Mirrors Pre-Existing Human Slop(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Steven Johnson on Eagleman podcast: LLM averageness helps society but threatens creativity — stevenbjohnson · 2026-11-14
- Peter Diamandis: Trust, not intelligence, is the biggest barrier to AI adoption — PeterDiamandis · 2026-11-14
- Brain has 200T synapses yet forgets a penny; a 20T-param LLM forgets nothing — fleetwood___ · 2026-11-14
- Jradoff: The 4x Efficiency Gain Isn't the Point—Cheap Prototypes Let Studios Bet on MMOs Again — jradoff · 2026-11-14
- Every opens its Frontier team's AI experiment log with code and writeups — danshipper · 2026-11-14
- Would China chip export controls actually give Anthropic pricing power? Reddit says no — supplykatusa · 2026-11-14