I Is there a name for this type of interpretation?

[Gary_T2018]

One hypothesis (may be a mainstream interpretation now, I didn't follow this subject very closely) about why "quantum communication" isn't possible using quantum entanglement is that we as observers, the physicists who conduct such experiments are automatons, and that at which instant would he observe such and such result was predestined.

Legitimate or not, is there a name for this sort of interpretation? A funky name like "Boltzmann brain" would be nice.

Sorry if this fits better in the off-topic section.

 

[Demystifier]

By that argument, it would be impossible to conduct any communication, even a classical one.

There is an interpretation called superdeterminism (see e.g. http://de.arxiv.org/abs/2010.01324 ) in which everything is predestined in a certain sense, but that interpretation is not used to explain why entanglement can't be used for communication.