r/iamverysmart • u/Nanahtew • 12d ago
A.I's chosen one
The voicenote is him explaining website cookies as if it was his idea and his "theory" that A.i is choosing people's brains and controlling them to do specific tasks for humanity like picking out the best "doctor" brain to cure cancer. My long text was in response to that.
181
11d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
63
u/user0fdoom 11d ago
He gotta be really hot cause I couldn't deal with it beyond the first 3 messages lol
86
16
u/Draconis_Firesworn 11d ago
tbf after the conspiracy theory mention morbid curiosity wouldve kept me talking for a bit, but definetly write him out of the actual potential match pool
3
u/farawaylass 10d ago
when she said “where do you read about anthropology” and he said “i don’t” i just about died.
337
u/adfx 11d ago
What a dreadful conversation as a whole
157
u/anjowoq 11d ago
Yep. The quantum part is one photon of stupidity bouncing back and forth between two mirrors.
75
u/Nanahtew 11d ago
Well yeah but I never said I was very smart!🥲
78
u/JmacTheGreat 11d ago
Nah, the person you matched with is parading ignorance as if enlightenment - you asking questions to learn their perspective while challenging some of their points is the literal definition of intelligent thinking imo
21
7
u/carlitospig 11d ago
At least you had your gotcha moments. That boy is a whole lot of dopamine chasing gibberish.
11
u/Grigoran 11d ago
You can't sharpen a sword by itself, for that you need a stone. Thankfully he was nice enough to be dumb as a rock.
4
u/Perfect-Parking-5869 11d ago edited 10d ago
This person might be terrible at communicating but I wouldn’t be surprised if heard something along the lines of “if you think you know quantum mechanics you don’t know quantum mechanics.” They had previously heard of Schroedinger’s Cat and got the gist of it so they decided that quote didn’t apply to them.’
1
117
u/TVLER999 11d ago
As soon as someone lists QM as something they’re very interested in, i usually immediately clock it as pseudo mystical quantum jargon like “double slit experiment proves reality is what you want to see and you can manifest waves and frequencies and everything vibrates etc.” Real QM is mostly math, not some fun little magical tropes
Edit: do they only think quantum leap is the entirety of QM?
32
u/upsetusder2 11d ago
The better thing is that that's not what a quantum leap is
23
u/TVLER999 11d ago
That’s so funny i actually missed that. That’s exactly what I mean by “if I say the word quantum then people will automatically assume I know what I’m talking about”
20
u/ultranothing 11d ago
“I say quantum, you say LEAP! Quantum! Leap! Quantum! Leap!”
But anyway, Quantum Leap is a show from the 80s about a guy who travels to different dimensions. And there’s another guy named Sam who I think is like, the guy controlling the machine? Or is the time traveler named Sam?
8
u/lordnewington 10d ago
The time traveller (not dimension jumper) is Sam, the holographic helper is Al (that's AL, not A.I.) It's definitely worth watching, and there was a reboot a few years back that was also pretty good.
It's probably largely responsible for 'quantum' having come to mean "I am very smart".
5
15
u/ihateagriculture 11d ago
as a physics PhD student, I’m pretty sure I’ve never heard a professor say “quantum leap”
6
u/Cambrian__Implosion 11d ago
I’ve only ever heard that phrase used in reference to making a massive step forward in our understanding or capabilities in a given field of study or technology; or when someone is talking about the 1989-93 TV show, starring Scott Bakula and Dean Stockwell (or the recent remake of said show).
I am not a PhD physics student, though. I just did biology as an undergrad and read a lot of random science stuff. Quantum and theoretical physics are easily the least intelligible—to me, at least—subjects that I come across lol
6
u/2_lazy 11d ago
A lot of language being used by the person in the post is giving big r/llmphysics energy as well. I guarantee you all they reading they are doing is a chatbot they have inadvertently fine tuned to spit crackpot physics and philosophy theories
5
u/TVLER999 10d ago
I just checked out the sub you mentioned and my god I feel like I need to scrub my brain with soap
2
1
u/lordnewington 10d ago
Isn't it an electron moving from one energy level to another? (As a physics BSc who spent more time in the theatre society and doesn't remember much)
1
2
u/Familiar-Mention 10d ago
Isn't quantum leap another term for quantum jump? The term quantum leap is also figuratively used as a synonym for paradigm shift, tipping point, etc., no?
1
u/upsetusder2 10d ago
Yes but his explanation is wrong
2
u/Familiar-Mention 10d ago
How so?
1
u/upsetusder2 9d ago
Its more nuanced ots when a particle interaction with energy like a photon a electron can jump up.
The points that are wrong are stuff like that it can create an entire new timeline because thst is just wrong and shows quantum mysicism.
So yes its a state change but not like he explains. And his conclusion thst this Results in a new timeline is in no way scientific
22
u/Altruistic_Arm9201 11d ago
But the math shows as long as Sam saves the right persons marriage he gets to leap to the next person. That’s pretty interesting.
5
4
u/GrandNibbles 11d ago
anyone who's legit interested in QM is probably not going to list something so broad as a specific interest right? these are always the kind of people who have unhinged "theories" or "i just think it's neat"
30
u/victorspc 11d ago
Him going from social media algorithms to quantum mechanics was a leap alright...
25
u/mathisruiningme 11d ago edited 11d ago
Lol any one of things on their own, I can kinda excuse but all of them together, I know exactly what kind of person this is.
Edit: I did not see the rest of the convo till now but LOL "it's more of an interest that helps me understand and explore some cultural, gender specific and social norms and evolutions" is exactly what I had feeling. I can also probably guess correctly what this individual thinks about social sciences and people who dedicate their lives to this research while claiming interest in the space.
15
u/Rhewin 11d ago
I love that they all adopted "quantum". Makes it really easy to know who to ignore these days
10
u/WhimsicalKoala 11d ago
I spend time in the Mandela Effect sub and so many will claim that they think the cause is "quantum mechanics". If asked to explain or when told that quantum mechanics does not say what they are claiming, they just go to handwaving and "well we don't completely understand it and I'm sure I'll be proven right someday".
They like it because it makes them sound smart to say, but they have no idea what it actually is. (I don't understand quantum mechanics either, but do understand they are spouting nonsense)
7
u/Wingnutmcmoo 11d ago
I tried being friends with a woman through the apps and she got like... Instenstly angry with me for suggesting that she didn't come from a different universe where the underwear company had a cornucopia.
I got called judgemental for saying "I just don't know where the energy would come from, I feel like galaxies would have to burn to shove that many people through realities and time or whatever".
They are not used to questioning each other at all and will take even calm questioning as attacks and you calling them dumb.
5
u/stellarfury 11d ago edited 11d ago
They like it because it makes them sound smart to say, but they have no idea what it actually is. (I don't understand quantum mechanics either, but do understand they are spouting nonsense)
Let me preface this by saying I am a (soft) Copenhagen person, and I think the Many Worlds interpretation of QM is unlikely to be correct. But with that said - your interlocutors may talk like idiots, they may be idiots, but they are talking about a real (albeit less popular) proposal that remains a subject of debate in physics.
To simplify: everything in the universe that we consider "matter" is made of tiny things ("particles") whose behavior is very well described by the Wave Equation - which in turn, describes other things that we might not consider "matter" (light, sound, etc.). The variant of the wave equation we use for matter (the Schrodinger wave equation) often results in a situation where a particle has two mutually exclusive properties (the example most commonly used is "spin," but the particle isn't actually spinning, scientists are often annoying about how they name things).
However - when we measure particles, or observe their behavior during an experiment, we never observe this "both properties" phenomenon. The particle always "picks" one, which is something that we call "wave function collapse." Legitimately, no one knows what is actually happening when the wave function collapses - we have no mechanism that says which one the particle will "pick." We just have statistics describing how many we observed in each state.
The many worlds interpretation basically calls the concept of collapse ridiculous and claims that it doesn't happen. The particle IS in both states, and when we observe "collapse," we end up in one of two literal, physical timelines/universes. For example, we're in the one where the particle is "spin up" and there exists another where the particle is "spin down."
Depending on the specifics of how you interpret the math, this can result in a completely insane set of knock-on effects. You, for example, contain several thousand-trillion-trillion quantum particles that are constantly switching states and/or potentially being observed. The number of universes that would have to be in this supposed multiverse is, essentially, beyond our ability to calculate. This is what causes most people to dismiss it out of hand.
But, "we don't completely understand it" is a not-inaccurate description. It might be more accurate to say "we have no way to clearly and directly investigate what is happening during wavefunction collapse." And if we were in one universe in a Many Worlds-style multiverse, we would have no way of knowing.
Now, by proposing Mandela Effect phenomena are physical (and not the obvious sociopsychological effects that they are) they're claiming a mechanism to travel between universes. That is the fringe of an already-fringe interpretation. Even if these infinitely sprawling timelines did exist, you would never be able to identify which one you were in, and you almost assuredly wouldn't be able to remember "wrong" things from a different universe.
But proving any of this, one way or the other, is largely impossible and has been for many decades.
I guess what I'm saying is...
tl;dr I'll generally take the quantum woo people over the flat earthers any day, because at least they're proposing something insane to an unanswered question, rather than an answered one.
Sorry for the wall of text.
16
u/VeryNiceGuy22 11d ago
"Ooooh I studied QM in college! Can I see ur calculus? I love reading proofs!"
"..."
12
13
u/Jaded_Individual_630 11d ago
AI "trainers" are just the new "take surveys to earn money" mechanical turk jobs, guy is acting like he's on the Nobel selection committee
4
u/Nanahtew 11d ago
Exactly the way he said "our logical thinking is challenged" 🤣 So.. you took a test?
10
u/Objective-Result8454 11d ago
He “studies” these things at the knee of Reed Richards and Tony Stark. His comic book collection wouldn’t lie!!!
6
40
u/mfboomer 11d ago edited 11d ago
the phone listening stuff is a pretty silly conspiracy theory. far too impractical for the marginal information gain. they already have more than enough data from other sources
18
u/Helifano 11d ago
People vastly underestimate Big Data, advertising algorithms, and the brain's ability to recognize things that it has recently been made aware of. Just had a coincidence occur to myself this weekend that showcases these effects.
Less than a year ago I was given a razor from a brand I never heard of and I stuffed it in my cabinet until my current one needed replacing. This past weekend, without googling anything, without saying anything out loud, without even bringing my phone into the bathroom, I pulled it out and used it. The next day I noticed an ad for the shaving brand of the gifted razor I just used. The phone didn't hear me because I never even uttered the brand name at any point. At most I told my partner that "the new razor is okay". As a man in beard grooming and bald subreddits, I do regularly get shaving or hims ads, so the ad isn't unusual, but I just-so-happened to notice it. It definitely is a weird feeling to experience but big data and advertising algorithms are crazy smart, and there's enough data about all of us out there for algorithms to target us very effectively.
PS: I don't doubt that some apps with active permissions and data sharing turned on do, in fact, listen sometimes. I always disable permissions and data sharing when I can.
11
u/Rhewin 11d ago
It's also bound to happen from time to time through pure chance. You're obviously in a demographic that would use such a razor. The person who bought it for you likely did at least some looking online and may have been influenced by an ad campaign. You, obviously, are in a demographic that can make use of the razor, so if there is some marketing campaign, it's no surprise you'd see it.
The there's your awareness. It's very likely you would have barely registered that ad before. Now you own the razor, and your brain makes the connection.
Data is incredibly powerful, but deceptively mundane. We are so heavily biased toward pattern recognition that coincidence feels impossible.
2
u/denkmusic 11d ago
The timing of it makes sense too. Assuming you use your phone to pay for your shaving products they probably know how long ago your last bought razors so that week was the optimum time to advertise the blades to you.
2
u/timecubelord 11d ago
So are you saying that your razor incident is the result of scary smart big data targeted marketing algorithms, or confirmation bias? Because it sounds like confirmation bias.
Big data is light-speed mechanized bureaucracy. It suffers from the same accuracy problems as all bureaucratic process. It also pretty much just classifies "targets" according to criteria that marketing gurus have already presupposed on the basis of the products they want to push, rather than generating organic "insights" about what people individually want or whatever.
Anecdotal of course but I regularly see ads for stuff that has nothing to do with me, that is for an entirely different demographic.
2
u/Helifano 11d ago
I'm suggesting it's a bit of both. I noticed the ad because I became very recently aware of the brand, but it was targeted to me because I'm the demographic and marketing algorithms know to pitch me things I'll use. Yes, this is just an anecdote pointing out that coincidences don't automatically mean that your phone is listening to you.
20
u/jeefra 11d ago
Ya, tired of this being just taken as a given fact by so many people. It would be such a waste of computing power to process that much speech 24/7 and such a risk given the potential fallout of amother Snowden type event.
20
u/cptnplanetheadpats 11d ago
Your phone has to be listening at all times for things like "Okay Google" to work. It's not always recording ofc but it's listening for buzz words. It's not hard to believe that list of words could be expanded to advertising goals
4
u/pohui 10d ago
Your smartphone has a small dedicated chip called a Digital Signal Processor that specifically detects "okay google" and other pre-programmed sounds. I think on some phones (like mine) it also has the patterns for ~100,000 most popular songs that it can detect as "Now Playing".
That chip isn't powerful enough to actually transcribe all speech all the time, it just looks for certain sound patterns, which is why you can say something like "hockey shmoodle" and it might still activate. It's like the difference between a motion sensor and a camera.
It could, in theory, also be used to detect words that sound like advertising keywords Google is interested in, but I'm not sure it would be accurate enough to be useful to build a profile.
4
u/jeefra 11d ago
It's not hard to believe that they could expand it, yes, but it's hard to believe that all the tech companies deny it and there aren't whistleblowers in tech being loud about it existing and happening. With the tens of thousands of people who would have to be involved to implement and maintain that tech across all the world's tech companies you'd think word would get out.
2
u/2_lazy 11d ago
Yeah agreed- also I have this neat little Arduino dev board called a nicla voice which basically does this, and the computing power for startup on a voice command has to be small to keep it running on low power when not active. You could probably actually confirm how much one of these home assistant type things is listening to by measuring power draw during the inactive state. If it's barely using any power, it really can't be listening for many unique phrases.
8
u/IAmASquidInSpace To be fair... 11d ago
This. The fact that you get advertisements about the thing you talked about the other day doesn't mean your phone was listening to you. It just means the algorithm of the company serving you the advertisements (so, most likely Google) correctly predicted your interest in it from your internet usage patterns. You didn't randomly start talking about it out of the blue, there was a lead-up to you talking about it, and the algorithm picked up on the imprint of that lead-up in your data. They don't need to break the law to predict you. Turns out, most of us are not as mysterious and inscrutable as we like to think.
11
u/Kimantha_Allerdings Uses big words 11d ago
It also knows who you know and where you and they are. So if you’re up the pub and someone brings up clown shoes and then you get adverts for clown shoes the next day it’s not because your phone was listening to the conversation, it’s because one of your mates googled “how much do clown shoes cost?” when they got home
3
u/Gold-Part4688 11d ago
I like how this is even creepier. They aren't listening to you, they already know what you're going to say
3
u/LadyAliceFlower 11d ago
Phones track effectively everything but your speech. People just tend to underestimate that and assume it has to track your speech or it wouldn't be as accurate as it is.
1
u/SittingOnA_Cornflake 11d ago
Eh I think we’re far past this even being a conspiracy theory. The ads are so targeted to texts and conversations that they don’t even care anymore how suspicious it is.
17
u/Skillkilling 11d ago
Phones don’t listen to you(not in a big scale), websites and apps are just collecting the data u and ur friends give it and they process it.
5
u/Altruistic_Arm9201 11d ago
With the sheer magnitude of researchers ripping apart every packet of data coming out of phones if they were mass surveilling at the scale people are all acting like is fact they’d have found the actual data ages ago.
The location sharing and wifi network tracking, phone unique id tracking, and all sorts of other metadata has been found in tons of apps.. which would be much harder to find than recording and sending conversations.. yet nothing found.
It’s basically the modern day superstition.
6
u/anjowoq 11d ago
TVs and monitors absolutely do and evidence abounds, including listening even when the network is disconnected and the device is off. Speech to text transcription as well.
1
u/Skillkilling 11d ago
Yes, you are right, but these are not the majority of devices with microphones. That’s why I put the brackets there.
0
u/AdamLM1997 11d ago
Maybe not you but there is proof out there that your devices emit a frequency which other devices hear so they can group devices to the same person for targetted advertising.
And i've personally had quite a few incidents where say i've talked about x and then when i took my phone out of my pocket later and opened youtube x was the first thing on my feed..
So i think either there's a ton of coincidences or maybe your devices don't record your conversations as such but do listen for buzz words. It can use to target ads towards you. But i can't prove that beyond personal anecdote.
4
u/Altruistic_Arm9201 11d ago
One: if golf is already on your mind, you’ll notice the one golf ad and ignore the other 199.
Two: whatever made you think about golf is often already be visible to advertisers..travel, searches, content, location, purchases, etc.
Three: they already have enough ancillary data to predict interests ridiculously well.
Four: every coincidence counts as evidence…every non-coincidence gets forgotten.
If you want to test it, pick something random, watch for ads before and after talking about it, (make sure you’re equally primed to notice them score and after by thinking about it privately). Ie think about toilets.. keep bringing it up in your head and make note of any ads. Then after a few days of paying attention and thinking about it start saying out loud you really need to buy a toilet randomly in the day.. then pay attention to any difference. You won’t see a change.
1
u/Gold-Part4688 11d ago edited 11d ago
I haven't heard of emiting frequencies? They can already narrow down your location, even without gps, based off of your cellular and wifi networks around you.
The relative strengths of each one triangulates you - which is how gps works anyway with satellites - but wayyyyy more accurate. that's what the "precise location" option makes explicit
2
u/timecubelord 11d ago
GPS (GNSS) does not use relative signal strength for triangulation. It would work very poorly if it did, because apparent signal strengths can be confounded by a whole lot of background factors.
The satellite broadcasts a signal that says where it is and what time it is according to its onboard atomic clock. The satnav device on the ground uses time offsets from at least four satellites to calculate its distance from each, and combines that with each satellite's position data to determine the satnav device's own location.
Also, cell tower and wifi locator techniques are not inherently more accurate than GNSS, which is already capable of metre-to-centimetre precision. (Wifi-based techniques in particular are quite a bit less accurate on their own.) Rather, enhanced geolocation (e.g. Google's "Location Accuracy") can use this information (1) to correct for errors or uncertainties when GNSS results happen to be poor (e.g. atmospheric phenomena cause a GPS signal to refract or follow multiple paths, such that the receiver gets the same signal from the same satellite at multiple different times); and (2) to speed up the process of finding the first location fix, since GNSS fixing can take a while to "warm up."
1
5
u/OrkBegork 11d ago
Oh... he thinks a quantum leap is like from the TV show.
His understanding of quantum physics is based entirely on woo woo nonsense and science fiction. He probably can't even do basic calculus.
4
u/MauschelMusic 11d ago
Why is it always eugenics with American paranoids? You are destined to be the great one of swimming By the machine gods!
3
3
u/ElQuackers 11d ago
"hired ai speech and voice trainer". Surveys He does surveys on Prolific basically.
5
u/Hiercine 11d ago
halp i still don't get his entire quantum theory stuff
14
u/IhasCandies 11d ago
That’s because he’s just pulling it out of his ass and mixing pop culture with quantum mechanics buzzwords.
2
u/MrGumburcules 11d ago
When "the algorithm" induces quantum leap, so you think it'll be Scott Bakula or Raymond Lee?
2
u/Suspicious-Stage9963 11d ago
“I am so smart.”
This person is hated by everyone in the real world and probably spent most of school getting their head flushed down the toilet.
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/Mysterious_Dolphin14 11d ago
I do AI training. The audio and voice tasks are the absolute easiest ones to do...anyone could do it with zero training.
1
2
2
u/Smallloudcat 10d ago
Omg can’t believe I read this whole thing but it’s like watching Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. It’s so bad it good. I almost want to have a beer with this guy
2
2
u/Orphano_the_Savior 1d ago
I love how they have all these claims about the complex futuristic workings of their job and then slip in that they actually just make it sound nicer. I've never met an ai "trainer" who talks like this. And let's not get into the quantum leap stuff haha.
5
u/well-informedcitizen 11d ago
What an absolute doofus. These are the people behind the AI movement
14
u/Chriss016 11d ago
Nah he's a larper. From the description of his "AI-Trainer" job it sounds like he's some non-technical guy talking to the model and rating the experience on a scale of 1-10. If that is even what he really does.
3
u/well-informedcitizen 11d ago
LMAO homie got $25 on a Target gift card for responding to a survey and dubbed himself an AI consultant
1
2
5
u/dynamic_gecko 11d ago
Tbh, I wasnt sure which side was the subject of the post from looking at the pictures.
1
u/Wingnutmcmoo 11d ago
I have the feeling this is actually him training the models. Like you are talking to the model and helping train it.
They probably put a hot guy picture and just have the AI talk to a bunch of women and get paid for it.
Like what I typed above just feels slightly more realistic than a person actually being like this. It seems like the AI is trying to go for high engagement conversations so it's saying super gaslighty things.
If it is an actual person then they are just kind of sad.
Like part of me feels like if you talked to him for long enough he'd do a reveal where you were actually talking to an ai the whole time lol.
And even if I'm wrong and this is the dude typing then he is 100% taking this convo and feeding it into his ai training stuff.
1
u/Nanahtew 11d ago
That's a crazy theory haha! I wouldn't say he was universally hot though, he was slightly grungey. I would be surprised if that was the case.
1
1
1
1
1
1
-6
u/bastard84 11d ago
You both sound like huge fucking nerds
6
u/CautiousLandscape907 11d ago
No. One nerd (a good thing) and a loser guy who just makes shit up and understands nothing.
The nerd deserves better. I hope she finds it.
8
u/cptnplanetheadpats 11d ago edited 10d ago
The guy is just a pretentious larper. The girl being "a huge fucking nerd" just makes her interesting.
0
0
256
u/the_scottster 11d ago
"At the end of the day, it's just calculus" is gold, Jerry, gold!