Agreed — superdeterminism is not so much a theory as a theory-for-a-theory at this stage (a vague guess at the form such a theory might take).
It is a sign of the much greater maturity of the physical collapse models that their parameters can be constrained by experiment. The ability to be constrained is a good sign, not a bad one.
I love John Preskill’s standard nod to superdeterminism in his writings: without mentioning it by name he says “I leave it up to the reader to decide how seriously to take this possibility” (get it?)
I think the right way to look at it is that superdeterminism is an umbrella term for a class of theories that have a certain property. Like some interpretations of quantum mechanics are "psi-ontic", meaning the wave function is considered physically real (like many worlds), vs. "psi-epistemic" where the wave function is considered a reflection of our knowledge of reality (Copenhagen).
It is a sign of the much greater maturity of the physical collapse models that their parameters can be constrained by experiment. The ability to be constrained is a good sign, not a bad one.
I love John Preskill’s standard nod to superdeterminism in his writings: without mentioning it by name he says “I leave it up to the reader to decide how seriously to take this possibility” (get it?)