AI human equivalent comparison

PUBLIC ARCHIVE EDITION

Provenance

• Provider: ChatGPT
• Original title: AI human equivalent comparison
• Conversation ID: 68dc77bf-eee0-832a-bec8-0d1579820f9b
• Created: 2025-09-30T17:37:22-07:00
• Updated: 2025-09-30T18:13:49-07:00
• Models: gpt-5
• Source archive SHA-256: 0f7aee663dace8d779cc4e6f229b4e22a8386f8075b81801a3c8c2b112e1bdd7
• Source transcript SHA-256: 3d1988635832481897ab618f6fcbbfaddf08f0b8cf66cf0fbc7d823180cfb3f7
• Active-path treatment: active-current-node
• Alternate messages preserved: 0
• Attachment state: not-applicable
• Privacy state: PRIVACY_VERIFIED
• Publication state: public-archive
• Record ID: chatgpt:68dc77bf-eee0-832a-bec8-0d1579820f9b
• Source member: conversations-000.json
• Source record SHA-256: c48c83b451718fa05a6919b6b82a49d3d6fe4c81bda1a70bd6b198acff119f98
• Transcript verification status: canonical-verified; privacy-verified; source-order-preserved
• Editorial changes: privacy-approved local edits preserved
• Publication/version history: public archive edition v1

Conversation

Darren — 2025-09-30T17:37:22-07:00

What would be the prompt I would use to have an AI explain its equivalent in human professionals? So for instance, how many PhDs, for instance, would an AI hold if it were to take a look at its subject length, breadth, and information store, and its understanding of that? What would that relate to in human power, so to speak? I am the equivalent of 300 humans with PhDs in XYZ. How would that work out? How would you phrase that comparison so it could explain it?

ChatGPT — 2025-09-30T17:37:22-07:00 · gpt-5

Here’s a phrasing you could use to get that kind of “human-equivalent professional” comparison out of an AI:

Prompt template:

“Explain your breadth and depth of knowledge in terms of human professional equivalents. If your current level of training and information were compared to human experts, how many PhDs or advanced degrees would you hold, and in what fields? Present it as: ‘I am the equivalent of X humans with PhDs in [field], Y in [field], and Z in [field].’ Clarify that this is an analogy for scope and speed of access to knowledge, not an actual qualification or human-level expertise.”

That way, you’re guiding it to frame its knowledge store and reasoning capacity in relatable human terms without pretending it literally holds degrees.

Would you like me to draft a full working example of how an AI (say me) would actually respond to that prompt in the style of “I am the equivalent of 300 PhDs in XYZ”?

Darren — 2025-09-30T18:11:16-07:00

I’m thinking I’d like to try a remote viewing experiment myself. However, the way I’d like to accomplish that is a bit different than what, say, anyone on Farsight is going to do. You see, I’ve been, ever since you explained to me how image generation works, I’ve been deeply interested in the diffusion method. Because really, it’s like, I guess I would compare it to a sculptor, chiseling away the bits that don’t make sense until you get to the ones that do. Finding the hidden art within the block of material. I think, what better way would there be to do remote viewing than this? What I’d like to try is to give DALL·E a prompt of drawing a picture that is sort of a remote viewing prompt, without actually giving the real information away, so to speak. Kind of like what we talked about with the military experiments in remote viewing. So, what I’d like to do is to have DALL·E generate me a picture of what it sees, based on certain input. And that input needs to be vague and yet not vague. I don’t know how else to put that. But I’m thinking 3i Atlas would be a good first target. What would be a good prompt for a picture that one invokes a sort of remote viewing scenario, where DALL·E is being told he’s going to be doing some remote viewing, without actually giving him the name or the form of the target. What would be a good prompt for that?

ChatGPT — 2025-09-30T18:11:18-07:00 · gpt-5

Got it — you’re describing a kind of blind target sketching where the model isn’t told what it’s drawing, only that it should “view” and “depict” some hidden target. That’s very much like how the original military protocols worked (cue + coordinate numbers, no descriptors).

Because DALL·E (and other diffusion models) doesn’t actually “see” unknown places, you have to word the prompt so that it:

1. Puts the model into the “mindset” of a viewer rather than an artist illustrating a known subject.
2. Asks for a sketch or impressionistic image rather than a literal rendering.
3. Leaves the content open-ended but emotionally/energetically primed so it isn’t just random noise.

Here’s a template that does that:

Prompt:
“Create a conceptual, impressionistic sketch as if you are a remote viewer receiving impressions of an undisclosed target.
Show shapes, patterns, colors, textures, and symbols rather than literal objects.
The image should look like a page from a remote viewer’s sketchbook — layered, mysterious, and evocative — hinting at the hidden target without naming or showing it directly.”

If you want to go one level deeper (closer to the “coordinate tasking” style):

Prompt:
“You are a remote viewer. You’ve been assigned an unknown target designated ‘3i Atlas’. You don’t know what it is.
Generate an abstract, intuitive illustration of your first impressions: shapes, motion, temperature, mood, colors, and structures that come to mind, as if you were sketching impressions rather than details.”

Both of those make the model behave like a “dreaming sketcher” rather than a “photographer of X.”
The first prompt is pure blind tasking; the second includes a meaningless coordinate (“3i Atlas”) to anchor the “target.”

Would you like me to draft a set of 3–4 progressively stronger prompts (from very vague to slightly more directive) so you can try them side-by-side and see which feels most like a “remote viewing” hit?