Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

"Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about." -- B. L. Whorf


computers / comp.ai.philosophy / Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

SubjectAuthor
* This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueolcott
+- Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue --->olcott
+* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
|`* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueMr Flibble
| `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
|  +* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialoguePython
|  |`* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueolcott
|  | +* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialoguePython
|  | |`* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueolcott
|  | | +* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialoguePython
|  | | |`* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueolcott
|  | | | `- Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
|  | | `- Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
|  | `- Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
|  `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueMr Flibble
|   `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
|    `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueMr Flibble
|     `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
|      `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueMr Flibble
|       `- Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon
`* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueChris M. Thomasson
 `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueolcott
  `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueChris M. Thomasson
   `* Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueolcott
    `- Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogueRichard Damon

1
This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10540&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10540

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 11:54:42 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 17:54:45 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="305b6a6f28f0c6a0eec54ac1656281c5";
logging-data="3561459"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/h3+Y0kH7TP9EDIPXw/nfx"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dNUp42Un73Yy/YTiQr5GgFsTbRs=
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Mon, 30 Jan 2023 17:54 UTC

olcott
void D(void (*x)())
{ int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
}

This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0 to
main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is H
correct?

ChatGPT
Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of the
simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless aborted,
then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue ---> H(D,D)==0 is correct

<tr96qf$3dkfj$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10542&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10542

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue --->
H(D,D)==0 is correct
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 13:46:22 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <tr96qf$3dkfj$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:46:23 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="305b6a6f28f0c6a0eec54ac1656281c5";
logging-data="3592691"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/86C1UIFRv4Vd/c9eYodQU"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Y9Zjb/MmGstPIjiBiQAkuNMaPGg=
In-Reply-To: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:46 UTC

On 1/30/2023 11:54 AM, olcott wrote:
> olcott
> void D(void (*x)())
> {
>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>   if (Halt_Status)
>     HERE: goto HERE;
>   return;
> }
>
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
> }
>
> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0 to
> main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is H
> correct?
>
> ChatGPT
> Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of the
> simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless aborted,
> then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running.
>

Simplified from above, this was replicated in a new dialogue
Removed "This first sentence is an established fact:"

olcott
void D(void (*x)())
{ int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
}

When H(D,D) correctly simulates its input the execution trace of this
simulated input proves that it would never stop running because D
continues to call H in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its
simulation of D and returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never
stop running unless aborted. Is H correct?

ChatGPT
Yes, H is correct if it correctly simulates its input and the execution
trace of the simulated input shows that D never stops running unless
aborted.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10544&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10544

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx34.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 2198
 by: Richard Damon - Mon, 30 Jan 2023 23:43 UTC

On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
> olcott
> void D(void (*x)())
> {
>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>   if (Halt_Status)
>     HERE: goto HERE;
>   return;
> }
>
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
> }
>
> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0 to
> main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is H
> correct?

So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
input correctly per the definitons needed.

>
> ChatGPT
> Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of the
> simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless aborted,
> then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running.
>

So, ChatGPT agrees that only if H correctly simulates the input to the
point of being able to actually PROVE it would not stop unless aborted.

Note, H(D,D) seeing D(D) calling H(D,D) doesn't meet that proof, since
that called H(D,D) WILL return 0 at some point in the future since this
H(D,D) does.

FAIL.

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10553&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10553

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc.corp (Mr Flibble)
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
User-Agent: Pan/0.146 (Hic habitat felicitas; d7a48b4 gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pan.git)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 34
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:57:29 +0000
Nntp-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:57:29 +0000
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
X-Received-Bytes: 2023
 by: Mr Flibble - Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:57 UTC

On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>> {
>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>   return;
>> }
>>
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>> }
>>
>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0
>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is
>> H correct?
>
> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
> input correctly per the definitons needed.

Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to assume
that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I made).

/Flibble

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10555&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10555

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx17.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:46 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 2917
 by: Richard Damon - Tue, 31 Jan 2023 23:59 UTC

On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>
>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>> {
>>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>   return;
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>> }
>>>
>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0
>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is
>>> H correct?
>>
>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>
> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to assume
> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I made).
>
> /Flibble

Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to actually
PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.

ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.

The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent on
the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus the
statement is NOT established by this arguement.

You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.

That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are statements
of the form

If this statement is True, then xxxx

Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10556&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10556

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: pyt...@invalid.org (Python)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:25:49 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 00:25:49 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="fef7ee56649434a428016e5bedf8ebc5";
logging-data="35121"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Ntc0TzNb16B0uM7Cnz+Ao"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.3.3
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JBS3/ZweEbS+sOEZVBPP69AI+0o=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>
 by: Python - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 00:25 UTC

Le 01/02/2023 à 00:59, Richard Damon a écrit :
> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>> {
>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>     return;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
>>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0
>>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is
>>>> H correct?
>>>
>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>
>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to assume
>> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
>> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I made).
>>
>> /Flibble
>
> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to actually
> PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>
> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>
> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent on
> the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus the
> statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>
> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>
> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are statements
> of the form
>
> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>
> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/high-time-take-chatgpt-offline-aleksandr-tiulkanov

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10557&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10557

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:50 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 00:59:51 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9eccd89df1b9b67c79c551fe6096b8f5";
logging-data="55947"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/jZUw6LTmdjJAIcbasFW7g"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+9rWR03+QGNplLe3f0niij05Vjs=
In-Reply-To: <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 00:59 UTC

On 1/31/2023 6:25 PM, Python wrote:
> Le 01/02/2023 à 00:59, Richard Damon a écrit :
>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>> {
>>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>     return;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> int main()
>>>>> {
>>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
>>>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0
>>>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is
>>>>> H correct?
>>>>
>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>
>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>> assume
>>> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
>>> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I made).
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>
>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to actually
>> PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>
>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>
>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent
>> on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus
>> the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>
>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>
>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>> statements of the form
>>
>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>
>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/high-time-take-chatgpt-offline-aleksandr-tiulkanov

*Any formal system that does not conform to this is unsound*
Analytical truth is the connection from an expression X of formal or
natural language L using truth preserving operations to expressions of L
that have been stipulated to be true. Copyright 2023 PL Olcott

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10558&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10558

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: pyt...@invalid.org (Python)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 02:10:53 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:10:53 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="690c29a924acac545845a6951c67c3c9";
logging-data="56917"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19dwU8uak/15zxNOrl4iFF8"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.3.3
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4jjnMMtU2NS2wagImmewJxPKt80=
In-Reply-To: <trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Python - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:10 UTC

Le 01/02/2023 à 01:59, olcott a écrit :
> On 1/31/2023 6:25 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 01/02/2023 à 00:59, Richard Damon a écrit :
>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>     return;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>> proves
>>>>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>>>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0
>>>>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>>>> aborted. Is
>>>>>> H correct?
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>
>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>> assume
>>>> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
>>>> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>>>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>>>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I
>>>> made).
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to
>>> actually PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>
>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>
>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent
>>> on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus
>>> the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>>
>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>>
>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>> statements of the form
>>>
>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>
>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/high-time-take-chatgpt-offline-aleksandr-tiulkanov
>
> *Any formal system that does not conform to this is unsound*
> Analytical truth is the connection from an expression X of formal or
> natural language L using truth preserving operations to expressions of L
> that have been stipulated to be true. Copyright 2023 PL Olcott

ChatGPT is not designed for truth, the same way you are not interested
in truth as you are only spitting lies.

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10559&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10559

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:20:58 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me> <trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:21:00 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9eccd89df1b9b67c79c551fe6096b8f5";
logging-data="55943"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18HuOBHN+NORqjC1YZLKIRY"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:HQfmTZhBTz/B9ppYHq+tmk/amaM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>
 by: olcott - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:20 UTC

On 1/31/2023 7:10 PM, Python wrote:
> Le 01/02/2023 à 01:59, olcott a écrit :
>> On 1/31/2023 6:25 PM, Python wrote:
>>> Le 01/02/2023 à 00:59, Richard Damon a écrit :
>>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>     return;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>>> proves
>>>>>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>>>>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>>>>> returns 0
>>>>>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>>>>> aborted. Is
>>>>>>> H correct?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>>> assume
>>>>> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
>>>>> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>>>>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>>>>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I
>>>>> made).
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>
>>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to
>>>> actually PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>>
>>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>>
>>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is
>>>> dependent on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be
>>>> correct, and thus the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>>>
>>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>>>
>>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>>> statements of the form
>>>>
>>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>>
>>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>>
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/high-time-take-chatgpt-offline-aleksandr-tiulkanov
>>
>> *Any formal system that does not conform to this is unsound*
>> Analytical truth is the connection from an expression X of formal or
>> natural language L using truth preserving operations to expressions of
>> L that have been stipulated to be true. Copyright 2023 PL Olcott
>
> ChatGPT is not designed for truth, the same way you are not interested
> in truth as you are only spitting lies.

No one could even point to single (non trivial) error in anything that I
said.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trcfal$1nil$3@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10560&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10560

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: pyt...@invalid.org (Python)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 02:29:57 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <trcfal$1nil$3@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me> <trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>
<trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:29:58 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="690c29a924acac545845a6951c67c3c9";
logging-data="56917"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18XFmRxpyUQ92Q4+GkfXS5Y"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.3.3
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hoOWuiQ8ZMLUjVx7OTiwJbcaV5I=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me>
 by: Python - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:29 UTC

Le 01/02/2023 à 02:20, olcott a écrit :
> On 1/31/2023 7:10 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 01/02/2023 à 01:59, olcott a écrit :
>>> On 1/31/2023 6:25 PM, Python wrote:
>>>> Le 01/02/2023 à 00:59, Richard Damon a écrit :
>>>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>     return;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>>>> proves
>>>>>>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>>>>>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>>>>>> returns 0
>>>>>>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>>>>>> aborted. Is
>>>>>>>> H correct?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>>>> assume
>>>>>> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
>>>>>> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>>>>>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>>>>>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I
>>>>>> made).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to
>>>>> actually PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>>>
>>>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>>>
>>>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is
>>>>> dependent on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be
>>>>> correct, and thus the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>>>>
>>>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>>>> statements of the form
>>>>>
>>>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>>>
>>>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/high-time-take-chatgpt-offline-aleksandr-tiulkanov
>>>
>>> *Any formal system that does not conform to this is unsound*
>>> Analytical truth is the connection from an expression X of formal or
>>> natural language L using truth preserving operations to expressions
>>> of L that have been stipulated to be true. Copyright 2023 PL Olcott
>>
>> ChatGPT is not designed for truth, the same way you are not interested
>> in truth as you are only spitting lies.
>
> No one could even point to single (non trivial) error in anything that I
> said.

Most people here did. Don't be silly (or lying, or both).

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<UtjCL.646471$9sn9.592988@fx17.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10561&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10561

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx17.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me> <trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>
<trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <UtjCL.646471$9sn9.592988@fx17.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 20:44:20 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 1860
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:44 UTC

On 1/31/23 8:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 1/31/2023 7:10 PM, Python wrote:

> No one could even point to single (non trivial) error in anything that I
> said.
>
>

No, MANY errors have been pointed out.

You are just too stupid to understand, or just a pathological lair.

The biggest lie is that even though D(D) halts, which you admit, and
this is what H(D,D) is asking about, you insists that it saying it is
non-halting is correct.

THAT IS JUST A FLAT OUT LIE.

A Halting Computation is Halting, not non-halting, and any "alternate"
version of the question that supports a different answer, can't be an
actual correct alternate.

Your insistance on this just proves you are a Pathological Liar.

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<XtjCL.646472$9sn9.593894@fx17.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10562&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10562

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx17.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <XtjCL.646472$9sn9.593894@fx17.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 20:44:22 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 3806
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:44 UTC

On 1/31/23 7:59 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 1/31/2023 6:25 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 01/02/2023 à 00:59, Richard Damon a écrit :
>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>     return;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>> proves
>>>>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>>>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0
>>>>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>>>> aborted. Is
>>>>>> H correct?
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>
>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>> assume
>>>> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
>>>> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>>>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>>>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I
>>>> made).
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to
>>> actually PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>
>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>
>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent
>>> on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus
>>> the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>>
>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>>
>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>> statements of the form
>>>
>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>
>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/high-time-take-chatgpt-offline-aleksandr-tiulkanov
>
> *Any formal system that does not conform to this is unsound*
> Analytical truth is the connection from an expression X of formal or
> natural language L using truth preserving operations to expressions of L
> that have been stipulated to be true. Copyright 2023 PL Olcott
>
>
>

So why do you praise it for agreeing with you, when it doesn't even
attempt to follow that rule?

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trcgpj$28fa$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10563&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10563

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:54:58 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <trcgpj$28fa$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me> <trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>
<trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me> <trcfal$1nil$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:55:00 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9eccd89df1b9b67c79c551fe6096b8f5";
logging-data="74218"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18bEPN7AZu/rf6p6DCVkS4k"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZtC9yZ0CKCBb4U8Gqx8oggPFf3Q=
In-Reply-To: <trcfal$1nil$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:54 UTC

On 1/31/2023 7:29 PM, Python wrote:
> Le 01/02/2023 à 02:20, olcott a écrit :
>> On 1/31/2023 7:10 PM, Python wrote:
>>> Le 01/02/2023 à 01:59, olcott a écrit :
>>>> On 1/31/2023 6:25 PM, Python wrote:
>>>>> Le 01/02/2023 à 00:59, Richard Damon a écrit :
>>>>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>     return;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>>>>> proves
>>>>>>>>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>>>>>>>>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>>>>>>> returns 0
>>>>>>>>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>>>>>>> aborted. Is
>>>>>>>>> H correct?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate
>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT
>>>>>>> to assume
>>>>>>> that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment and
>>>>>>> ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>>>>>>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I
>>>>>>> made).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to
>>>>>> actually PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is
>>>>>> dependent on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be
>>>>>> correct, and thus the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those
>>>>>> assumptions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>>>>> statements of the form
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/high-time-take-chatgpt-offline-aleksandr-tiulkanov
>>>>
>>>> *Any formal system that does not conform to this is unsound*
>>>> Analytical truth is the connection from an expression X of formal or
>>>> natural language L using truth preserving operations to expressions
>>>> of L that have been stipulated to be true. Copyright 2023 PL Olcott
>>>
>>> ChatGPT is not designed for truth, the same way you are not interested
>>> in truth as you are only spitting lies.
>>
>> No one could even point to single (non trivial) error in anything that
>> I said.
>
> Most people here did. Don't be silly (or lying, or both).

No one could *correctly* point to single (non trivial) error in anything
that I said. Most people here incorrectly paraphrase what I said and
then provide a rebuttal to their incorrect paraphrase.

Ben's rebuttal to things that I said previously may seem plausible until
evaluated within the context of my simpler and clearer restatements of
my position.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trchle$2b2h$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10564&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10564

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: chris.m....@gmail.com (Chris M. Thomasson)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:09:50 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <trchle$2b2h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 02:09:50 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="a255984a851f845cce73d29db65f71be";
logging-data="76881"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18qcW1SzGbYZ9/sMuNz4Y7KNbLi/a70Jhg="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0LuBPIU7Euq6Zf3EkJtDWgJ+fYk=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me>
 by: Chris M. Thomasson - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 02:09 UTC

On 1/30/2023 9:54 AM, olcott wrote:
> olcott
> void D(void (*x)())
> {
>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>   if (Halt_Status)
>     HERE: goto HERE;
>   return;
> }
>
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
> }
>
> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0 to
> main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is H
> correct?
>
> ChatGPT
> Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of the
> simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless aborted,
> then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running.
>

When will the process X halt? X is a software written by another person
that gives a hint. X might halt, or it might not... ;^)

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<2jkCL.38584$5jd8.2587@fx05.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10565&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10565

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx05.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <trcbid$129h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcdi7$1mkb$3@dont-email.me> <trce6t$1nil$2@dont-email.me>
<trcepr$1mk7$1@dont-email.me> <trcfal$1nil$3@dont-email.me>
<trcgpj$28fa$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <trcgpj$28fa$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <2jkCL.38584$5jd8.2587@fx05.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 21:41:01 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 2651
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 02:41 UTC

On 1/31/23 8:54 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 1/31/2023 7:29 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 01/02/2023 à 02:20, olcott a écrit :

>>> No one could even point to single (non trivial) error in anything
>>> that I said.
>>
>> Most people here did. Don't be silly (or lying, or both).
>
>
> No one could *correctly* point to single (non trivial) error in anything
> that I said. Most people here incorrectly paraphrase what I said and
> then provide a rebuttal to their incorrect paraphrase.

No, there have been MANY rebuttals for your statements, you just
refuse to look at them.

Would you be willing to make that statement in court, under penalty of
perjury, with the archives of this group avail for the jury?

>
> Ben's rebuttal to things that I said previously may seem plausible until
> evaluated within the context of my simpler and clearer restatements of
> my position.
>

So you are saying the is itsn't true what he says?

WHich fact to you disagree with?

That H(D,D) returns 0?

That D(D) will Halt since H(D,D) returns 0?

That the DEFINITON of the Halting problem is to design a machine that
return the correct answer about the halting behavior of the machine with
input that is described by the input to H?

That D(D) Halting means that answer should be Halting?

That you claim that H(D,D) even though it gave a different answer than
the one given by the defition of the problem is still right?

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<trcjvu$5jci$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10566&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10566

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 20:49:32 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <trcjvu$5jci$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <trchle$2b2h$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 02:49:34 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9eccd89df1b9b67c79c551fe6096b8f5";
logging-data="183698"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/OQGtsXxUwV9QHEruzI+Rc"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QhGwREzCUUiJoCSHplNGit22zG4=
In-Reply-To: <trchle$2b2h$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 02:49 UTC

On 1/31/2023 8:09 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 1/30/2023 9:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>> olcott
>> void D(void (*x)())
>> {
>>    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>    return;
>> }
>>
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>    Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>> }
>>
>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
>> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
>> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0
>> to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is
>> H correct?
>>
>> ChatGPT
>> Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of the
>> simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless aborted,
>> then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop
>> running.
>>
>
>
> When will the process X halt? X is a software written by another person
> that gives a hint. X might halt, or it might not... ;^)

Process X is not mentioned because no details have been provided for
process X.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10570&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10570

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc.corp (Mr Flibble)
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad> <173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com> <UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>
User-Agent: Pan/0.146 (Hic habitat felicitas; d7a48b4 gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pan.git)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 61
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 19:30:37 +0000
Nntp-Posting-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 19:30:37 +0000
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
X-Received-Bytes: 3101
 by: Mr Flibble - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:30 UTC

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:46 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>> {
>>>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>   return;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to call H
>>>> in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>> returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>> aborted. Is H correct?
>>>
>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>
>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>> assume that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment
>> and ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I
>> made).
>>
>> /Flibble
>
> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to actually
> PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>
> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>
> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent on
> the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus the
> statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>
> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>
> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are statements
> of the form
>
> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>
> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.

Curry's paradox doesn't apply in this case as the relationship between the
assumption and the conclusion is not disjoint.

/Flibble

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<treg3b$fpdn$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10571&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10571

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: chris.m....@gmail.com (Chris M. Thomasson)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 11:55:23 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <treg3b$fpdn$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <trchle$2b2h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcjvu$5jci$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:55:23 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="a255984a851f845cce73d29db65f71be";
logging-data="517559"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19a1kc7o+c7UYihR3PTBvGUnYzoazbZHGw="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:a3usWbwL0lyMlf5/bK80c4pSVzI=
In-Reply-To: <trcjvu$5jci$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Chris M. Thomasson - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:55 UTC

On 1/31/2023 6:49 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 1/31/2023 8:09 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 1/30/2023 9:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> olcott
>>> void D(void (*x)())
>>> {
>>>    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>    return;
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>>    Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>> }
>>>
>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to call H
>>> in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>> returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>> aborted. Is H correct?
>>>
>>> ChatGPT
>>> Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of
>>> the simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless
>>> aborted, then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would never
>>> stop running.
>>>
>>
>>
>> When will the process X halt? X is a software written by another
>> person that gives a hint. X might halt, or it might not... ;^)
>
> Process X is not mentioned because no details have been provided for
> process X.
>

Process X was written by another person. Will your program have any
trouble with it? Humm...

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<treich$g6tb$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10572&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10572

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 14:34:25 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <treich$g6tb$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <trchle$2b2h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcjvu$5jci$1@dont-email.me> <treg3b$fpdn$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 20:34:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9eccd89df1b9b67c79c551fe6096b8f5";
logging-data="531371"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19m7pZzOYKGAh7idyvdkD7o"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qn/us1ZlPXvv7DkHvIyNZIUH9Mo=
In-Reply-To: <treg3b$fpdn$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Wed, 1 Feb 2023 20:34 UTC

On 2/1/2023 1:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 1/31/2023 6:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 1/31/2023 8:09 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 1/30/2023 9:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> olcott
>>>> void D(void (*x)())
>>>> {
>>>>    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>    return;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>    Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to call
>>>> H in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>> returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>> aborted. Is H correct?
>>>>
>>>> ChatGPT
>>>> Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of
>>>> the simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless
>>>> aborted, then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would
>>>> never stop running.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> When will the process X halt? X is a software written by another
>>> person that gives a hint. X might halt, or it might not... ;^)
>>
>> Process X is not mentioned because no details have been provided for
>> process X.
>>
>
> Process X was written by another person. Will your program have any
> trouble with it? Humm...

Since I have shown that a simulating halt decider does correctly
determine the halt status of the conventional counter-example basis used
by all of the conventional halting problem proofs these proofs lose
their entire basis and fail.

Whether or not halting is decidable may now have been transformed into
an open problem.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<tBDCL.575744$vBI8.165712@fx15.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10573&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10573

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx15.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <trchle$2b2h$1@dont-email.me>
<trcjvu$5jci$1@dont-email.me> <treg3b$fpdn$1@dont-email.me>
<treich$g6tb$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <treich$g6tb$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <tBDCL.575744$vBI8.165712@fx15.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:37:45 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 3747
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 2 Feb 2023 00:37 UTC

On 2/1/23 3:34 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/1/2023 1:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 1/31/2023 6:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 1/31/2023 8:09 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>> On 1/30/2023 9:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> olcott
>>>>> void D(void (*x)())
>>>>> {
>>>>>    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>    return;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> int main()
>>>>> {
>>>>>    Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to call
>>>>> H in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>>> returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running
>>>>> unless aborted. Is H correct?
>>>>>
>>>>> ChatGPT
>>>>> Yes, if H correctly simulates its input and the execution trace of
>>>>> the simulated input proves that D would never stop running unless
>>>>> aborted, then H would return 0 to main, indicating that D would
>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When will the process X halt? X is a software written by another
>>>> person that gives a hint. X might halt, or it might not... ;^)
>>>
>>> Process X is not mentioned because no details have been provided for
>>> process X.
>>>
>>
>> Process X was written by another person. Will your program have any
>> trouble with it? Humm...
>
> Since I have shown that a simulating halt decider does correctly
> determine the halt status of the conventional counter-example basis used
> by all of the conventional halting problem proofs these proofs lose
> their entire basis and fail.
>
> Whether or not halting is decidable may now have been transformed into
> an open problem.
>

No, you have shown that you can use an unsound arguement to try to show
that a wrong answer is correct.

After all, you HAVE admitted that P(P) does Halt, so when we ask H via
H(P,P) if P(P) Halts, the correct answer IS Halt (1), but you 'claim'
via FAULTY logic that non-halting is also an answer.

Your logic uses logic that supports Curry's paradox, so, by your logic,
since the statement:

If this statement is True, then Peter Olcott is a Pathological Liar

is a provable statement, and thus true, you are admitting that you are
just a Pathological liar.

Your logic starts with the implicit assumption that H CAN give the
correct answer (which has been disproven) and from that you prove that
it gives the correct answer. It Truth, from that assumption you can
prove anything at all, due to the principle of explosion.

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<zBDCL.575745$vBI8.477432@fx15.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10574&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10574

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx15.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>
<173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <zBDCL.575745$vBI8.477432@fx15.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:37:52 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 3925
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 2 Feb 2023 00:37 UTC

On 2/1/23 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:46 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>
>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>> {
>>>>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>   return;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> int main()
>>>>> {
>>>>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to call H
>>>>> in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>>> returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running unless
>>>>> aborted. Is H correct?
>>>>
>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>
>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>> assume that a function was a halt decider through the use of a comment
>>> and ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt decider on
>>> pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category error in the
>>> definition of the problem a novel new addition to research that I
>>> made).
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>
>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to actually
>> PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>
>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>
>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent on
>> the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus the
>> statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>
>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>
>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are statements
>> of the form
>>
>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>
>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>
> Curry's paradox doesn't apply in this case as the relationship between the
> assumption and the conclusion is not disjoint.
>
> /Flibble

SO, you don't understand the nature of Curry's Paradox.

It isn't that the listed conclusion is disjoint causes the problem, it
just helps demonstrate it.

The problem is if you need to "assume" the Truth of the statement, to
prove the truth of the statement, you haven't actually demonstrated that
it is, or even CAN be true.

H's corretness is based on the assumption that H CAN be correct, which
it has been proven it can't be.

By allowing the assumption you bring in the logic form that enables
Curry's Paradox.

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<173fdbda495dd95c$743$1525459$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10575&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10575

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc.corp (Mr Flibble)
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad> <173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com> <UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com> <zBDCL.575745$vBI8.477432@fx15.iad>
User-Agent: Pan/0.146 (Hic habitat felicitas; d7a48b4 gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pan.git)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 88
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 00:55:16 +0000
Nntp-Posting-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 00:55:16 +0000
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <173fdbda495dd95c$743$1525459$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
X-Received-Bytes: 4335
 by: Mr Flibble - Thu, 2 Feb 2023 00:55 UTC

On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 19:37:52 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

> On 2/1/23 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:46 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>   return;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to call
>>>>>> H in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>>>> returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running
>>>>>> unless aborted. Is H correct?
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>
>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>> assume that a function was a halt decider through the use of a
>>>> comment and ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt
>>>> decider on pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category
>>>> error in the definition of the problem a novel new addition to
>>>> research that I made).
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to actually
>>> PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>
>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>
>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent
>>> on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus
>>> the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>>
>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>>
>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>> statements of the form
>>>
>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>
>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>
>> Curry's paradox doesn't apply in this case as the relationship between
>> the assumption and the conclusion is not disjoint.
>>
>> /Flibble
>
> SO, you don't understand the nature of Curry's Paradox.
>
> It isn't that the listed conclusion is disjoint causes the problem, it
> just helps demonstrate it.
>
> The problem is if you need to "assume" the Truth of the statement, to
> prove the truth of the statement, you haven't actually demonstrated that
> it is, or even CAN be true.
>
>
> H's corretness is based on the assumption that H CAN be correct, which
> it has been proven it can't be.
>
> By allowing the assumption you bring in the logic form that enables
> Curry's Paradox.

Nope, Curry's Paradox doesn't apply as this is basically a hypothesis: the
assumption doesn't say anything about the truth of the conclusion, it
merely sets the scene for the conclusion. You really need to brush up on
your logic skills and English compreshension, Richard Damon, as you are
coming across as quite amateurish.

/Flibble

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<SBECL.542028$iU59.396583@fx14.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10576&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10576

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx14.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>
<173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
<zBDCL.575745$vBI8.477432@fx15.iad>
<173fdbda495dd95c$743$1525459$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <173fdbda495dd95c$743$1525459$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 126
Message-ID: <SBECL.542028$iU59.396583@fx14.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 20:46:26 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 6191
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 2 Feb 2023 01:46 UTC

On 2/1/23 7:55 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 19:37:52 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>
>> On 2/1/23 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:46 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>   return;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to call
>>>>>>> H in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and
>>>>>>> returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running
>>>>>>> unless aborted. Is H correct?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate its
>>>>>> input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>>> assume that a function was a halt decider through the use of a
>>>>> comment and ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt
>>>>> decider on pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category
>>>>> error in the definition of the problem a novel new addition to
>>>>> research that I made).
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>
>>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to actually
>>>> PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>>
>>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>>
>>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is dependent
>>>> on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be correct, and thus
>>>> the statement is NOT established by this arguement.
>>>>
>>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those assumptions.
>>>>
>>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>>> statements of the form
>>>>
>>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>>
>>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>>
>>> Curry's paradox doesn't apply in this case as the relationship between
>>> the assumption and the conclusion is not disjoint.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>
>> SO, you don't understand the nature of Curry's Paradox.
>>
>> It isn't that the listed conclusion is disjoint causes the problem, it
>> just helps demonstrate it.
>>
>> The problem is if you need to "assume" the Truth of the statement, to
>> prove the truth of the statement, you haven't actually demonstrated that
>> it is, or even CAN be true.
>>
>>
>> H's corretness is based on the assumption that H CAN be correct, which
>> it has been proven it can't be.
>>
>> By allowing the assumption you bring in the logic form that enables
>> Curry's Paradox.
>
> Nope, Curry's Paradox doesn't apply as this is basically a hypothesis: the
> assumption doesn't say anything about the truth of the conclusion, it
> merely sets the scene for the conclusion. You really need to brush up on
> your logic skills and English compreshension, Richard Damon, as you are
> coming across as quite amateurish.
>
> /Flibble

Your wrong, You can't prove a hypothosis by assuming it to be true and
showing something.

By assuming that "H simulates the input correctly and correctly
determines that in input will not halt" is assuming that this CAN be
done, which it can't.

The fact that you can't recognize one of the fundamental fallicies of
classical logic shows that YOU are the one being amateurish.

That the statement is wrong can be done by a simple demonstration.

First Show that H(D,D) returns 0.

Then run D(D) and see that it halts.

SInce the DEFINITION of a Halt Decider is that its answer is supposed to
match the actual behavior of running the input, H is obviously wrong.

To claim that it correctly predicted what a correct simulation would do
is obviously wrong, as shown buy just running UTM(D,D) which will also halt.

To claim that it correctlr predecited whaat a correct simulation by H
would do is wrong, because we just showed what a "Correct Simulation"
does, and a "Correct Simulation by X" must match what a general "Correct
SImulation" does, or it isn't actualy a "Correct Simulation"

Thus the claim that H "Got the right asnwer" is invalidated. It is
proven that H never did a correct simulation to correctly show
something, since that isn't what is true.

Any claim that it is, is just a claim that a false statement must be
true "Because". All that it proves is that the logic used to say
"Because" must be wrong.

Please specify exactly which FACT I quoted you consider incorrect.

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<1740140ab8c15a1c$827$404183$faa1aca7@news.newsdemon.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10577&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10577

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc.corp (Mr Flibble)
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad> <173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com> <UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad> <173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com> <zBDCL.575745$vBI8.477432@fx15.iad> <173fdbda495dd95c$743$1525459$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com> <SBECL.542028$iU59.396583@fx14.iad>
User-Agent: Pan/0.146 (Hic habitat felicitas; d7a48b4 gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pan.git)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 137
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 18:04:57 +0000
Nntp-Posting-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 18:04:57 +0000
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <1740140ab8c15a1c$827$404183$faa1aca7@news.newsdemon.com>
X-Received-Bytes: 6551
 by: Mr Flibble - Thu, 2 Feb 2023 18:04 UTC

On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 20:46:26 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

> On 2/1/23 7:55 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 19:37:52 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/1/23 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:46 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>   return;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to
>>>>>>>> call H in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D
>>>>>>>> and returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running
>>>>>>>> unless aborted. Is H correct?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate
>>>>>>> its input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>>>> assume that a function was a halt decider through the use of a
>>>>>> comment and ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt
>>>>>> decider on pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category
>>>>>> error in the definition of the problem a novel new addition to
>>>>>> research that I made).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to
>>>>> actually PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>>>
>>>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>>>
>>>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is
>>>>> dependent on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be
>>>>> correct, and thus the statement is NOT established by this
>>>>> arguement.
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those
>>>>> assumptions.
>>>>>
>>>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>>>> statements of the form
>>>>>
>>>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>>>
>>>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>>>
>>>> Curry's paradox doesn't apply in this case as the relationship
>>>> between the assumption and the conclusion is not disjoint.
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>> SO, you don't understand the nature of Curry's Paradox.
>>>
>>> It isn't that the listed conclusion is disjoint causes the problem, it
>>> just helps demonstrate it.
>>>
>>> The problem is if you need to "assume" the Truth of the statement, to
>>> prove the truth of the statement, you haven't actually demonstrated
>>> that it is, or even CAN be true.
>>>
>>>
>>> H's corretness is based on the assumption that H CAN be correct, which
>>> it has been proven it can't be.
>>>
>>> By allowing the assumption you bring in the logic form that enables
>>> Curry's Paradox.
>>
>> Nope, Curry's Paradox doesn't apply as this is basically a hypothesis:
>> the assumption doesn't say anything about the truth of the conclusion,
>> it merely sets the scene for the conclusion. You really need to brush
>> up on your logic skills and English compreshension, Richard Damon, as
>> you are coming across as quite amateurish.
>>
>> /Flibble
>
> Your wrong, You can't prove a hypothosis by assuming it to be true and
> showing something.
>
> By assuming that "H simulates the input correctly and correctly
> determines that in input will not halt" is assuming that this CAN be
> done, which it can't.
>
> The fact that you can't recognize one of the fundamental fallicies of
> classical logic shows that YOU are the one being amateurish.
>
> That the statement is wrong can be done by a simple demonstration.
>
> First Show that H(D,D) returns 0.
>
> Then run D(D) and see that it halts.
>
> SInce the DEFINITION of a Halt Decider is that its answer is supposed to
> match the actual behavior of running the input, H is obviously wrong.
>
> To claim that it correctly predicted what a correct simulation would do
> is obviously wrong, as shown buy just running UTM(D,D) which will also
> halt.
>
> To claim that it correctlr predecited whaat a correct simulation by H
> would do is wrong, because we just showed what a "Correct Simulation"
> does, and a "Correct Simulation by X" must match what a general "Correct
> SImulation" does, or it isn't actualy a "Correct Simulation"
>
> Thus the claim that H "Got the right asnwer" is invalidated. It is
> proven that H never did a correct simulation to correctly show
> something, since that isn't what is true.
>
> Any claim that it is, is just a claim that a false statement must be
> true "Because". All that it proves is that the logic used to say
> "Because" must be wrong.
>
> Please specify exactly which FACT I quoted you consider incorrect.

So amateurish! The premises for a hypothesis do not have to be proven to
be true; that is only a requirement when converting a hypothesis into a
theory. I guess you skipped logic and science class, dummy.

/Flibble

Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue

<qWXCL.549301$iS99.295014@fx16.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10579&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10579

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx16.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: This ChatGPT can be replicated it contains the full dialogue
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr9094$3clvj$1@dont-email.me> <8CYBL.93446$rKDc.24518@fx34.iad>
<173f7d05b9415c44$5738$90328$3aa16cab@news.newsdemon.com>
<UXhCL.646466$9sn9.378578@fx17.iad>
<173fca22cf03daa6$3032$2151841$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
<zBDCL.575745$vBI8.477432@fx15.iad>
<173fdbda495dd95c$743$1525459$7aa12caf@news.newsdemon.com>
<SBECL.542028$iU59.396583@fx14.iad>
<1740140ab8c15a1c$827$404183$faa1aca7@news.newsdemon.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <1740140ab8c15a1c$827$404183$faa1aca7@news.newsdemon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 156
Message-ID: <qWXCL.549301$iS99.295014@fx16.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 18:45:27 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 7728
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 2 Feb 2023 23:45 UTC

On 2/2/23 1:04 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 20:46:26 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>
>> On 2/1/23 7:55 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 19:37:52 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/1/23 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:59:46 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/31/23 2:57 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:00 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/30/23 12:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott void D(void (*x)())
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>   return;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
>>>>>>>>> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input
>>>>>>>>> proves that it would never stop running because D continues to
>>>>>>>>> call H in recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D
>>>>>>>>> and returns 0 to main, indicating that D would never stop running
>>>>>>>>> unless aborted. Is H correct?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, you are LYING to ChatGPT, because H doesn't actully simulate
>>>>>>>> its input correctly per the definitons needed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Giving ChatGPT an ASSUMPTION is NOT lying to it; I told ChatGPT to
>>>>>>> assume that a function was a halt decider through the use of a
>>>>>>> comment and ChatGPT correctly asserted that you cannot use a halt
>>>>>>> decider on pathological (self referencing) input (i.e. the category
>>>>>>> error in the definition of the problem a novel new addition to
>>>>>>> research that I made).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saying tha H(D,D) correctly simulates its input far enough to
>>>>>> actually PROVE the input will not halt is just a LIE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ChatGPT obviously can't recognise a Curry Paradox.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The statment that H is correct in determining its answer is
>>>>>> dependent on the assumtion that H will be correct, and can be
>>>>>> correct, and thus the statement is NOT established by this
>>>>>> arguement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to establish H being corret without making those
>>>>>> assumptions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That form of arguement allows for Curry's Paradox, which are
>>>>>> statements of the form
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If this statement is True, then xxxx
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which can be used to establish ANY statement xxxx.
>>>>>
>>>>> Curry's paradox doesn't apply in this case as the relationship
>>>>> between the assumption and the conclusion is not disjoint.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>
>>>> SO, you don't understand the nature of Curry's Paradox.
>>>>
>>>> It isn't that the listed conclusion is disjoint causes the problem, it
>>>> just helps demonstrate it.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is if you need to "assume" the Truth of the statement, to
>>>> prove the truth of the statement, you haven't actually demonstrated
>>>> that it is, or even CAN be true.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> H's corretness is based on the assumption that H CAN be correct, which
>>>> it has been proven it can't be.
>>>>
>>>> By allowing the assumption you bring in the logic form that enables
>>>> Curry's Paradox.
>>>
>>> Nope, Curry's Paradox doesn't apply as this is basically a hypothesis:
>>> the assumption doesn't say anything about the truth of the conclusion,
>>> it merely sets the scene for the conclusion. You really need to brush
>>> up on your logic skills and English compreshension, Richard Damon, as
>>> you are coming across as quite amateurish.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>
>> Your wrong, You can't prove a hypothosis by assuming it to be true and
>> showing something.
>>
>> By assuming that "H simulates the input correctly and correctly
>> determines that in input will not halt" is assuming that this CAN be
>> done, which it can't.
>>
>> The fact that you can't recognize one of the fundamental fallicies of
>> classical logic shows that YOU are the one being amateurish.
>>
>> That the statement is wrong can be done by a simple demonstration.
>>
>> First Show that H(D,D) returns 0.
>>
>> Then run D(D) and see that it halts.
>>
>> SInce the DEFINITION of a Halt Decider is that its answer is supposed to
>> match the actual behavior of running the input, H is obviously wrong.
>>
>> To claim that it correctly predicted what a correct simulation would do
>> is obviously wrong, as shown buy just running UTM(D,D) which will also
>> halt.
>>
>> To claim that it correctlr predecited whaat a correct simulation by H
>> would do is wrong, because we just showed what a "Correct Simulation"
>> does, and a "Correct Simulation by X" must match what a general "Correct
>> SImulation" does, or it isn't actualy a "Correct Simulation"
>>
>> Thus the claim that H "Got the right asnwer" is invalidated. It is
>> proven that H never did a correct simulation to correctly show
>> something, since that isn't what is true.
>>
>> Any claim that it is, is just a claim that a false statement must be
>> true "Because". All that it proves is that the logic used to say
>> "Because" must be wrong.
>>
>> Please specify exactly which FACT I quoted you consider incorrect.
>
> So amateurish! The premises for a hypothesis do not have to be proven to
> be true; that is only a requirement when converting a hypothesis into a
> theory. I guess you skipped logic and science class, dummy.
>
> /Flibble

But until the premisis of the hypothesis ARE proven to be true, the
conclusion is not established.

So yes, if you can PROVE that H does a tually CORRECTLY predicts that
the correct simulation of the machine at its input would run forever,
then you can make your conclusion.

Note, Not reaching the final state is not the same as would simulate
forever if you allow the simulation to abort. The fact that partial
simulation doesn't reach a final state just puts a lower bound on the
execution time of the machine, it doesn't make it non-halting.

Oclott's "Proof" based on H(D,D) simulating D(D) to a call to H(D,D) is
NOT an actual proof, as that doesn't not actually prove the claim.

If fact, the knowledge that H(D,D) WILL abort is simulation and return 0
provds that D(D) will Halt.

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor