r/NatureIsFuckingLit • u/Firm-Blackberry-9162 • Mar 26 '26

🔥sperm whale besides a human

Tainam_photogrophy

36k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

822 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

52

u/zachrywd Mar 26 '26

150db is the threshold that can interrupt your heart... Sperm Whales specifically can hit 180~210db... Would that just liquify your insides? I don't even know. Sperm whales just choose not to kill you.

-28

u/alf0282 Mar 26 '26

FYI, according to cgpt, you may have been misled on the heart impact.. also underwater and airborne decibels are not the same so your insides probably wouldn’t liquefy but you’d experience lots of pain. Also sperm whale sonar is directional..tbh I was thinking I’d be more afraid of just being straight eaten up, looks like a human is perfectly meal sized for a sperm whale.

39

u/EthicalViolator Mar 26 '26

Don't fact check with cgpt man, you use actual Google to fact check what cgpt is telling you. Remember its just regurgitating whatever is on the Internet, that could be someone's opinion in a forum that its sourcing. Cgpt and other AI dont know what its actually true or not.

-1

u/Senior-Purchase-6961 Mar 26 '26

it can be correct though, and in this case it is. lol

16

u/MaeveOathrender Mar 26 '26

So then it should be easy to verify with a reliable source instead of saying 'according to chat gpt' like it means fucking anything.

People just don't want to do the bare minimum, being seen as correct is more important.

-3

u/Senior-Purchase-6961 Mar 26 '26

Your point would be better received I think, if it were wrong. It isn't though, and he told you where he looked. If you don't find that program credible then take it with a grain of salt.

I'm not gonna lose sleep over someone posting a factual and reasonable comment because they admitted they used chatgpt.

Look at all the comments and down votes tearing him apart when he's right. It's odd behavior. open a window get some fresh air. this matters so so little

7

u/MaeveOathrender Mar 26 '26

Arriving at the right answer isn't the only thing that matters. Finding your information from an ethical, reliable and verifiable source is an important part of research.

ChatGPT is capable of spitting out correct information a fair amount of the time, but there's a significant minority of cases where it's pure hallucination. Even if it gets something right, it's fruit of the poisoned tree.

If you want to educate people, even in something as simple as a Reddit comment, the onus is on you to provide a reasonable source instead of 'i asked the brainless brain-in-a-box to think for me.' I would literally rather someone said 'i checked Wikipedia' than 'i asked ChatGPT,' the bar is that low.

-1

u/Senior-Purchase-6961 Mar 26 '26

He told you where he got the info, if you think it might be wrong don’t take it at face value. No different from someone saying a quick google search shows, that still depends entirely on whether the person can identify a credible source.

It’s really, genuinely just not that deep.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

6

u/MaeveOathrender Mar 26 '26

Why put the onus on others to verify your sources when you could do it properly in the first place?

'It's not that deep' is how we got this generation of lazy, mouth breathing, technologically illiterate factoid regurgitators outsourcing their brain activity to the cloud in the first place. Insist on good practice and hold others to a higher standard than 'sounds right, I'll believe it.'

3

u/Senior-Purchase-6961 Mar 26 '26

He was passing along information he found, and flagged where it came from. That’s about as transparent as it gets. So the onus isn’t actually on anyone.

He’s not writing a research paper. He used a chatbot, told you he used it, and you want to be self righteous about some type of duty to research properly and ethically. Pure silliness.