Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: ChatGPT correctly analyzed the first page of my paper:
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 09:36:27 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <vdjlpc$38t86$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vdgpbs$2nmcm$1@dont-email.me> <vdgqhn$2nmcm$2@dont-email.me>
 <vdhaja$2qm1j$1@dont-email.me> <vdhhoc$2ma4$1@news.muc.de>
 <vdi0mh$2u1sn$1@dont-email.me> <vdj4hr$2k6$1@news.muc.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2024 16:36:28 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ddfbe8e236b96e9eb22acbe29860ad61";
	logging-data="3437830"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18E4QjExa4TYJ2Hn+V9Q6V3"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qcNV4jpErb8uSfxS7thKfxNPdGQ=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vdj4hr$2k6$1@news.muc.de>
Bytes: 3564

On 10/2/2024 4:42 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 10/1/2024 2:15 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 10/1/2024 7:39 AM, olcott wrote:
> 
>>>> Simulating Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D
> 
>>> [ .... ]
> 
> 
>>>>> https://chatgpt.com/share/66fbec5c-7b10-8011-9ce6-3c26424cb21c
> 
> 
>>>> The above link to a ChatGPT conversation is entirely
>>>> complete with the first part being the entire input
>>>> provided to ChatGPT. The second part is the output that
>>>> ChatGPT deriving from analyzing this input.
> 
>>> You are aware that programs like ChatGPT are know for "hallucinating"
>>> non-facts?  They have even less understanding of the truth than you do.
> 
>>> In fact, they tend to regurgitate whatever "facts" they are fed with.
> 
>> In other words you can convince it that its analysis
>> of my work is incorrect. I dare you to try to do that.
> 
> I've got better things to do with my time.  Real live competent
> mathematicians have shown your work to be incorrect. 


Try this for yourself.
Real live computer scientists begin with the assumption that I
am incorrect and then try to justified that false assumption.

ChatGPT has not been indoctrinated thus reports on what it
sees.

https://chatgpt.com/share/66fbec5c-7b10-8011-9ce6-3c26424cb21c

Does HHH have to abort its emulation of DDD to prevent the infinite 
execution of DDD?

Several software engineers (two with master degrees in computer science)
Agree with the ChatGPT answer to the above question when they were asked
to independently derive this answer. Any C programmer that understands
infinite recursion has agreed.

> What a dumb chat
> program regurgitates has no relevance to anything.
> 

Unless what this dumb chat program says is irrefutably correct.
To show that it is correct one must find an actual mistake.

No one has ever done that. The most that they did is show that
things did not conform to their provably false assumptions.

> [ .... ]
> 
>> -- 
>> Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
>> hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
> 


-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer