> Hundreds of kilobytes is not a lot of information. Humans are very, very predictable. It's not clear that the deviation of one human from the mean has a lot

> Hundreds of kilobytes is not a lot of information. Humans are very, very predictable. It's not clear that the deviation of one human from the mean has a lot of information. It's not clear that it /doesn't/, either -- but I'd sure as heck take the under on gigabytes for novelty of text output. Keep in mind that we're not trying to model the internal state of a human machine; instead, we're discussing how much additional information is needed to align the output of a generic human text generator with the output of a specific individual. A lifetime is about two billion seconds -- so a gigabyte is four bits of data /per second/, or maybe two bits of data /per word/ for someone who continuously speaks for 70 years. Derate to a reasonable percentage of a lifetime spent generating output (10%? 1%?) and you're talking many, many bits per word. That's enough to Huffman compress their entire lifetime output with the "base model" entirely a dictionary, no need to even have a generative model!