So, to first approximation, the precision of a team of people can only be a little higher than the precision of its least precise member.
Power, on the other hand, is not like this. The power of a group is basically the sum of the power of its members.
This suggests a prediction: in practice, precision will be a limiting factor a lot more often than power, because it’s a lot easier to scale up power than precision.
Precision is a more scarce resource, and typically more valuable on the margin.
...Which is like predicting that humans have compute overhang, since (mental) power is compute, and (mental) precision is algorithms. Although, the hardware/software analogy additionally suggests that good algorithms are transmissible (which needn’t be true from the more general hypothesis). If that’s true, you’d expect it to be less of a bottleneck, since the most precise people could convey their more precise ways of thinking to the rest of the group.
This suggests a prediction: in practice, precision will be a limiting factor a lot more often than power, because it’s a lot easier to scale up power than precision.
Precision is a more scarce resource, and typically more valuable on the margin.
...Which is like predicting that humans have compute overhang, since (mental) power is compute, and (mental) precision is algorithms. Although, the hardware/software analogy additionally suggests that good algorithms are transmissible (which needn’t be true from the more general hypothesis). If that’s true, you’d expect it to be less of a bottleneck, since the most precise people could convey their more precise ways of thinking to the rest of the group.