I think its worth discounting against the failure rates of humans also.

> Depending on the context, and how picky you need to be about recognizing good or bad output, this might be anywhere from a 60% to a 95% success rate, with the remaining 5%-40% being bad results. This just isn't good enough for most practical purposes

This seems to suggest that humans are 100%. I'd be surprised if i was anywhere close to that after 10 years of programming professionally