Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<8f12bccec21234ec3802cdb3df63fd9566ba9b07@i2pn2.org>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: ChatGPT refutes the key rebuttal of my work
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 15:17:01 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <8f12bccec21234ec3802cdb3df63fd9566ba9b07@i2pn2.org>
References: <vegfro$lk27$9@dont-email.me> <veimqs$14que$1@dont-email.me>
	<veipf3$15764$1@dont-email.me>
	<36ecdefcca730806c7bd9ec03e326fac1a9c8464@i2pn2.org>
	<vejcoj$1879f$1@dont-email.me>
	<034767682966b9ac642993dd2fa0d181c21dfffc@i2pn2.org>
	<vekj4q$1hrgd$1@dont-email.me>
	<f8a15594bf0623a229214e2fb62ce4f4a2bd7116@i2pn2.org>
	<velpm2$1n3gb$6@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 15:17:01 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2155708"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3996
Lines: 55

Am Tue, 15 Oct 2024 08:11:30 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 10/15/2024 6:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 10/14/24 10:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/14/2024 6:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 10/14/24 11:18 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 10/14/2024 7:06 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Mon, 14 Oct 2024 04:49:22 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 4:04 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-13 12:53:12 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ChatGPT does correctly apply truth preserving operations to the
>>>>>>>>> premises that it was provided regarding the behavior of DDD and
>>>>>>>>> HHH.
>>>>>>>>> *Try to find a mistake in its reasoning*
>>>>>>>> No reasoning shown.
>>>>>>> https://chatgpt.com/share/6709e046-4794-8011-98b7-27066fb49f3e
>>>>>>> When you click on the link and try to explain how HHH must be
>>>>>>> wrong when it reports that DDD does not terminate because DDD does
>>>>>>> terminate it will explain your mistake to you.
>>>>>> It is nonsensical for HHH not to report that DDD terminates.
>>>>> The explanation is quite good. I will take what you said to mean
>>>>> that it was over your head or didn't bother to look at it.
>>>>> You never confirmed that you even know what infinite recursion is.
>>>> No, he means your argument is just non-sense, and it is just a
>>>> blantant lie that you put forwards because you just don't understand
>>>> what you are talking about.,
>>> In other words you coward away from trying to convince ChatGPT that is
>>> is incorrect.
>> What do you mean. With one statement I got it to admit that the ACTUAL
>> behavior of DDD was to halt.
>> 
>> 
>>> Since you say that it is a YES man it should be easy for you to get it
>>> to admit that it is wrong.
>> Which I did,
>> 
>>> https://chatgpt.com/share/6709e046-4794-8011-98b7-27066fb49f3e
>>> When you click on the link and try to explain how HHH must be wrong
>>> when it reports that DDD does not terminate because DDD does terminate
>>> it will explain your mistake to you.
>> I did that, and it admitted that DDD halts, it just tries to justify
>> why a wrong answer must be right.
> It explains in great detail that another different DDD (same machine
> code different process context) seems to terminate only because the
> recursive emulation that it specifies has been aborted at its second
> recursive call.
Yes! It really has different code, by way of the static Root variable.
No wonder it behaves differently.

> You err because you fail to understand how the same C/x86 function
> invoked in a different process context can have different behavior.
Do explain how a pure function can change.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.