Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!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 refutes the key rebuttal of my work
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:13:29 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 136
Message-ID: <vejfv9$1879f$5@dont-email.me>
References: <vegfro$lk27$9@dont-email.me>
 <b1d66ff0f5b7a9b18506850295a77fb3cdbc9b5a@i2pn2.org>
 <veghtn$lk27$14@dont-email.me>
 <24d92039f9728a52f6fe4566124d7b042f29f457@i2pn2.org>
 <veh72n$orit$3@dont-email.me>
 <69ea9ac4d5f72fd7596a86d949203b4549a8766e@i2pn2.org>
 <vehn04$sfi5$1@dont-email.me>
 <fb206f5da6fde63c5663eb52711df964705667e2@i2pn2.org>
 <veho0k$sfi5$3@dont-email.me>
 <cc259ae940078a29b43b7182fafa07b3ece0a831@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:13:30 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f8f20fff893307cbfb842dac28fd5b36";
	logging-data="1318191"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/kiRy0A3TE5cYqnu23qkek"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:vWo49cGCzFP3bEckVDbpllT6kQQ=
In-Reply-To: <cc259ae940078a29b43b7182fafa07b3ece0a831@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6446

On 10/14/2024 6:21 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/13/24 8:18 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/13/2024 7:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/13/24 8:01 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/13/2024 6:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 10/13/24 3:29 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/13/2024 1:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/13/24 9:28 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/13/2024 8:19 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/13/24 8:53 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Although it is possible for LLM systems to lie:
>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
>>>>>>>>>> Hallucination_(artificial_intelligence)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *The key premises are simply*
>>>>>>>>>> (a) the source code for DDD
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> WHich isn't the source code for the PROGRAM DDD
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Try to run that program just by itself.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It won't work, you need to include HHH (and everything it 
>>>>>>>>> calls) so that the "source code" for DDD needs to include the 
>>>>>>>>> definition of all of that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sorry, you are just proving you don't understand what you are 
>>>>>>>>> talking about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>>>>    return;
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (b) The design of HHH as a simulating termination analyzer.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which gets the wrong answer.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://chatgpt.com/share/6709e046-4794-8011-98b7-27066fb49f3e
>>>>>>>>>> Click on the above link to directly talk to ChatGPT about HHH
>>>>>>>>>> and DDD without logging in.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You have taught Chat GPT this error as shown in this statement:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have only provided the source-code for DDD and the design of HHH.
>>>>>>>> You have not shown how any details of exactly what I told ChatGPT
>>>>>>>> are incorrect.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You mean like this statement:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The termination analyzer HHH is designed to detect non- 
>>>>>>> terminating behavior. When HHH simulates DDD and sees this 
>>>>>>> pattern of infinite recursive calls, it identifies that DDD will 
>>>>>>> not terminate on its own.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't say that. ChatGPT said that.
>>>>>> ChatGPT used the first page starting with "You said:"
>>>>>> as its entire basis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Everything that I said is indented two inches*
>>>>>> Everything that ChatGPT said is prefaced by its logo symbol.
>>>>>
>>>>> So when you said:
>>>>>
>>>>> Every C programmer that knows that when HHH emulates the machine 
>>>>> language of, Infinite_Recursion it must abort this emulation so 
>>>>> that itself can terminate normally.
>>>>>
>>>>> When this is construed as non-halting criteria then simulating 
>>>>> termination analyzer HHH is correct to reject this input as non- 
>>>>> halting by returning 0 to its caller.
>>>>>
>>>>> We get the same repetitive pattern when DDD is correctly emulated 
>>>>> by HHH. HHH emulates DDD that calls HHH(DDD) to do this again.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You LIED, as that is NOT the non-halting critera, and we do not get 
>>>>> the "same pattern"
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess you don't understand the meaning of the words.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Arguements based on false premises are invalid.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I just asked it this:
>>>> Does HHH have correct non-halting criteria?
>>>>
>>>> It explained all of the details of how you are wrong.
>>>> Try it yourself.
>>>>
>>> No, you said that WAS the correct non-halting criteria.
>>>
>>> You said "When this is construed as non-halting criteria"
>>>
>>> That is a statement of fact, affirming that statement.
>>>
>>
>> *When I asked it to evaluate*
>> Does HHH have correct non-halting criteria?
> 
> If your criteria is that is can't completely emulate its input, NO.
> 

I did not ask it about myself I asked it about HHH.
You can't even pay attention to simple things.

I have a hard time paying attention too.
I fix this by reading and rereading the words
over and over and over until I am sure that
I got the meaning exactly correctly.

When I was in charge of a bank's credit card dispute
management system I had to read the VISA card change
document fifteen times. The Discover card change
document was much easier than this.


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