Re: Verified facts regarding the software engineering of DDD, HHH, and HHH1 --- TYPO

On 10/25/2024 7:27 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 10/24/24 8:56 PM, olcott wrote:

On 10/24/2024 6:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 10/24/24 9:36 AM, olcott wrote:

On 10/23/2024 9:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 10/23/24 9:51 PM, olcott wrote:

ChatGPT does completely understand this.
>

>
But, it is just a stupid idiot that has been taught to repeat what it has been told.
>

>
It is a brilliant genius that seems to infallibly deduce all
of the subtle nuances of each of the consequences on the basis
of a set of premises.

>
I guess you don't undetstand how "Large Language Models work, do you.
>
It has NO actual intelegence, or ability to "deduce" nuances, it is just a massive pattern matching system.
>
All you are doing is proving how little you understand about what you are talking about,
>
Remember, at the bottom of the page is a WARNING that it can make mistakes. And feeding it LIES, like you do is one easy way to do that.
>

>
There is much more to this than your superficial
understanding.  Here is a glimpse:
https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/03/04/1089403/large-language- models-amazing-but-nobody-knows-why/
>
The bottom line is that ChatGPT made no error in its
evaluation of my work when this evaluation is based on
pure reasoning. It is only when my work is measured
against arbitrary dogma that cannot be justified with
pure reasoning that makes me and ChatGPT seem incorrect.
>
If use your same approach to these things we could say that
ZFC stupidly fails to have a glimmering of understanding of
Naive set theory. From your perspective ZFC is a damned liar.
>

 The articles says no such thing.
 

*large-language-models-amazing-but-nobody-knows-why*
They are much smarter and can figure out all kinds of
things. Their original designers have no idea how they
do this.

In fact, it comments about the problem of "overfitting" where the processing get the wrong answers because it over generalizes.
 This is because the modeling process has no concept of actual meaning, and thus of truth, only the patterns that it has seen.
 AI's don't "Reason", they patern match and compare.
 Note, that "arbitrary dogma" that you try to reject, are the RULES and DEFINITONS of the system that you claim to be working in.
 

How about we stipulate that the system that I am
working in is termination analysis for the x86 language.
as my system software says in its own name: x86utm.

By your logic, Trump was right that he won, because he was saying we need to ignore the "dogma" of the truth and rules about voting, but instead use the fact that he got more votes than anyone else prior. That is the "proof" that he must have won, and the fact that Biden got more than him is just a misuse of "dogma".
 Sorry, you are just proving how utterly STUPID and IGNORANT you are, and that you logic has absolutely ZERO basis.
 Your new dependence of Chat GPT just shows your stupidity,

I have no need to depend on ChatGPT, yet ChatGPT does correctly
make every rebuttal of my work look ridiculously foolish.
Because of its preexisting knowledge of software development
it can even verify that the basis that it was given is a correct
basis.  What you call are lies are commonly known verified facts.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385090708_ChatGPT_Analyzes_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer --
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer