Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math, comp.ai.philosophy |
| Subject | Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 |
| Date | 2025-10-22 13:30 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10db4bb$pmc4$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (15 earlier) <10dajrk$kqr7$1@dont-email.me> <10dakha$kbsi$3@dont-email.me> <10dana3$lmat$4@dont-email.me> <10danfd$kbsi$7@dont-email.me> <10dapgc$mejp$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 10/22/2025 10:25 AM, olcott wrote: > On 10/22/2025 8:50 AM, dbush wrote: >> On 10/22/2025 9:47 AM, olcott wrote: >>> On 10/22/2025 8:00 AM, dbush wrote: >>>> On 10/22/2025 8:48 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 10/22/2025 7:25 AM, dbush wrote: >>>>>> On 10/22/2025 7:56 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 10:20 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-10-21, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 9:11 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-21, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 8:27 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-20, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 4:03 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-20, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 1:29 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-20, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/19/2025 2:39 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-19, dart200 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i don't get y polcott keep hanging onto ai for dear >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> life. anyone with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Throngs of dumb boomers are falling for AI generated >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> videos, believing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them to be real. This is much the same thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AI is just another thing Olcott has no understanding >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of. He's not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> researched the fundamentals of what it means to train >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a language >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> network, and how it is ultimately just token prediction. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It excels at generating good syntax. The reason for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vast amount of training data exhibits good syntax. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Where it has bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> syntax, it is idiosyncratic; whereas good syntax is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> broadly shared.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I provide a basis to it and it does perform valid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> semantic logical entailment on this basis and shows >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you're incapable of recognizing valid entailment >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from invalid. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any freaking idiot can spew out baseless rhetoric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such as this. I could do the same sort of thing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and say you are wrong and stupidly wrong. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you don't? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a whole other ballgame when one attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to point out actual errors that are not anchored >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in one's own lack of comprehension. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't comprehend the pointing-out. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You need to have a sound reasoning basis to prove >>>>>>>>>>>>> that an error is an actual error. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> No; /YOU/ need to have sound reasonings to prove /YOUR/ >>>>>>>>>>>> extraordinary claims. The burden is on you. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> We already have the solid reasoning which says things are >>>>>>>>>>>> other than as >>>>>>>>>>>> you say, and you don't have the faintest idea how to put a >>>>>>>>>>>> dent in it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In other words you assume that I must be wrong >>>>>>>>>>> entirely on the basis that what I say does not >>>>>>>>>>> conform to conventional wisdom. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes; you are wrong entirely on the basis that what you say >>>>>>>>>> does not >>>>>>>>>> follow a valid mode of inference for refuting an argument. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If you are trying to refute something which is not only a widely >>>>>>>>>> accepted result, but whose reasoning anyone can follow to see it >>>>>>>>>> for themselves, you are automatically assumed wrong. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The established result is presumed correct, pending your >>>>>>>>>> presentation of a convincing argument. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That's not just wanton arbitrariness: your claims are being >>>>>>>>>> directly refuted by elements of the established result which >>>>>>>>>> we can refer to. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I cannot identify any flaw in the halting theorem. It's not >>>>>>>>>> simply >>>>>>>>>> that I believe it because of the Big Names attached to it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And when I identify a flaw yo simply ignore >>>>>>>>> whatever I say. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nope; all the ways you say claim you've identified a flaw have been >>>>>>>> dissected by multiple poeple to a much greater detail than they >>>>>>>> deserve. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is disingenuous to say that you've simply had your details >>>>>>>> ignored. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Turing machines in general can only compute mappings >>>>>>> from their inputs. The halting problem requires computing >>>>>>> mappings that in some cases are not provided in the >>>>>>> inputs therefore the halting problem is wrong. >>>>>> >>>>>> False: >>>>>> >>>>>> (<X>,Y) maps to 1 if and only if X(Y) halts when executed directly >>>>>> (<X>,Y) maps to 0 if and only if X(Y) does not halt when executed >>>>>> directly >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes that it the exact error that I have been >>>>> referring to. >>>> >>>> That is not an error. That is simply a mapping that you have >>>> admitted exists. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> In the case of HHH(DD) the above requires HHH to >>>>> report on the behavior of its caller >>>> >>>> False. It requires HHH to report on the behavior of the machine >>>> described by its input. >>>> >>> >>> That includes that DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive >>> simulation. >> >> Which therefore includes the fact that HHH(DD) will return 0 and that >> DD will subsequently halt. > > You keep ignoring that we are only focusing on > DD correctly simulated by HHH. Which doesn't exist because HHH aborts.
Back to sci.math | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 22:00 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 23:05 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 22:13 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 23:16 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 22:25 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 23:29 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-21 03:20 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 22:29 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 06:56 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 08:25 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 07:48 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 09:00 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 08:47 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 09:50 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 09:25 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 14:27 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 13:30 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 15:40 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 10:47 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 17:07 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 12:11 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 13:38 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 18:40 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-10-22 13:24 -0600
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 14:30 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 15:31 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-10-22 20:34 +0100
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 19:52 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 15:00 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 20:20 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 15:35 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 16:43 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 --- NST olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 16:12 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 --- NST "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 14:32 -0700
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 --- NST dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 17:50 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 --- NST Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 23:01 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 --- NST olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 09:55 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 --- NST Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-23 16:47 +0000
"there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 12:22 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 11:50 -0700
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-23 21:11 +0000
"there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 17:08 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 15:21 -0700
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 15:26 -0700
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 18:40 -0400
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 17:48 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 19:09 -0400
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-23 23:55 +0000
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 19:00 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-23 23:45 +0000
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 18:51 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 20:14 -0400
"there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 17:14 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 18:33 -0400
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 23:15 +0000
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 18:24 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 20:14 -0400
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-23 01:22 +0000
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 20:47 -0500
Re: "there will still be a nested simulation tower" Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 22:13 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-10-23 08:02 +0200
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-23 09:51 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 14:55 -0500
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 16:24 -0400
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-22 21:55 +0000
Re: Never any actual rebuttal to HHH(DD)==0 Since 10/13/2022 dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-10-22 13:36 -0400
csiph-web