Pollucination: Why the rush to AGI via generative AI is self-defeating, and what to do about it
Pollucination: Why the rush to AGI via generative AI is self-defeating, and what to do about it
This paper contrasts the approaches of deep learning, a type of machine learning in which neural nets find patterns in data, and generative AI, a derivative of deep learning in which large-scale models used to generate new data based on the patterns detectable in their training data. It is argued that they produce a different type of focus. Deep learning focuses on problems set for them by humans, connecting their output with reality in an analogue of the correspondence theory of truth. Generative AI focuses on producing output based on an exploration of its model, focusing therefore on the model itself rather than on the problem set by the query, in an analogue of the coherence theory of truth. The problem with coherence is that the model is detached from the world, while human input to correct this is minimised. Generative AI therefore risks inaccuracies such as bias, hallucinations, sycophancy, increasing the amount of noise relative to signal, misinformation, and internalising and side-stepping safety guardrails. The pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI) exacerbates these problems by increasing generative AI’s thirst for data, so the output of one generation’s systems is likely to be fed into the succeeding generations, polluting the data commons. We call this phenomenon pollucination, and show that it leads to a tragedy of the commons, where competition to reach AGI reduces the perceived importance of safety. We argue, however, that the competition to reach AGI is based on false premises and unfounded narratives, and that this tragedy of the commons is therefore not a collective action problem where the actors are governed by rational self-interest. The solution to the problem is not hard, and is to be found in virtue ethics and responsible AI, although we are pessimistic as to whether the state of the industry will enable it to be implemented.
generative ai, ai, Deep learning
University of Southampton
O'hara, Kieron
0a64a4b1-efb5-45d1-a4c2-77783f18f0c4
Hall, Dame Wendy
11f7f8db-854c-4481-b1ae-721a51d8790c
June 2026
O'hara, Kieron
0a64a4b1-efb5-45d1-a4c2-77783f18f0c4
Hall, Dame Wendy
11f7f8db-854c-4481-b1ae-721a51d8790c
O'hara, Kieron and Hall, Dame Wendy
(2026)
Pollucination: Why the rush to AGI via generative AI is self-defeating, and what to do about it
Southampton.
University of Southampton
25pp.
(doi:10.5258/SOTON/WSI-WP017).
Record type:
Monograph
(Project Report)
Abstract
This paper contrasts the approaches of deep learning, a type of machine learning in which neural nets find patterns in data, and generative AI, a derivative of deep learning in which large-scale models used to generate new data based on the patterns detectable in their training data. It is argued that they produce a different type of focus. Deep learning focuses on problems set for them by humans, connecting their output with reality in an analogue of the correspondence theory of truth. Generative AI focuses on producing output based on an exploration of its model, focusing therefore on the model itself rather than on the problem set by the query, in an analogue of the coherence theory of truth. The problem with coherence is that the model is detached from the world, while human input to correct this is minimised. Generative AI therefore risks inaccuracies such as bias, hallucinations, sycophancy, increasing the amount of noise relative to signal, misinformation, and internalising and side-stepping safety guardrails. The pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI) exacerbates these problems by increasing generative AI’s thirst for data, so the output of one generation’s systems is likely to be fed into the succeeding generations, polluting the data commons. We call this phenomenon pollucination, and show that it leads to a tragedy of the commons, where competition to reach AGI reduces the perceived importance of safety. We argue, however, that the competition to reach AGI is based on false premises and unfounded narratives, and that this tragedy of the commons is therefore not a collective action problem where the actors are governed by rational self-interest. The solution to the problem is not hard, and is to be found in virtue ethics and responsible AI, although we are pessimistic as to whether the state of the industry will enable it to be implemented.
Text
2026-03 Pollucination
- Author's Original
More information
Published date: June 2026
Keywords:
generative ai, ai, Deep learning
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 512178
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/512178
PURE UUID: 26248a2f-c54a-403f-92c2-b1ad84a0fb9a
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 18 Jun 2026 16:44
Last modified: 29 Jul 2026 01:38
Export record
Altmetrics
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics