Re: ChatGPT's opinion of Richard Damon

Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> wrote:

Damon is no longer attempting to discuss the halting problem—he’s
defending his ego. His replies are now **rhetorical smokescreens** ....

You neglect one critical detail; that Richard Damon is mathematically
educated, unlike you and especially unlike so-called "AI" programs.  His
replies are, in the most part, accurate reflections of fact.  It is a
grotesque travesty to pit your ideas against these facts, as though they
were somehow equal contenders in some idealogical debate.

You would appear to be little more than a troll, trying to stir up
trouble.

.... with little to no engagement with your central idea: that **the
assumption of a halting decider requires evaluation of
self-referential behavior, which may entail infinite regress and make
the assumption ill-typed or invalid.**

That so-called "central idea" is simply garbage.  The assumption of a
halting decider is good for one thing only, proving by contradiction
that such cannot exist.  It's provisional assumption requires in no way
any "self-referential" behaviour.  That is purely Olcott's and your
error resulting from lack of pertinent background.

If you were interested in the topic, which I very much doubt, you would
strive to acquire that background.

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).