From Newsgroup: comp.lang.c

On 10/27/2025 10:17 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

[ .... ]

Now that four different LLM systems have been able
reverse-engineer the non-halting result by merely
being told to faithfully simulate DD with HHH and
see what happens this proves that all of my reviewers
have been dishonest with me for three years.

No, dishonest people don't congregate with eachother in newsgroups. What
the above proves is that your four LLM system are being "dishonest" with
you. They're hallucinating, perhaps due to having read so much of your nonsense in this newsgroup.

Remember the basic rule about your posts, which holds virtually
invariably: Olcott is wrong.

A straight forward sequence of steps that any
C programmer can easily determine:

int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}

HHH(DD) simulates DD that calls HHH(DD) to do this
again and again until HHH figures out what is up.

[ .... ]

--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.c

On 10/27/2025 8:22 AM, olcott wrote:

On 10/27/2025 10:17 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

[ .... ]

Now that four different LLM systems have been able
reverse-engineer the non-halting result by merely
being told to faithfully simulate DD with HHH and
see what happens this proves that all of my reviewers
have been dishonest with me for three years.

No, dishonest people don't congregate with eachother in newsgroups.  What >> the above proves is that your four LLM system are being "dishonest" with
you.  They're hallucinating, perhaps due to having read so much of your
nonsense in this newsgroup.

Remember the basic rule about your posts, which holds virtually
invariably:  Olcott is wrong.

A straight forward sequence of steps that any
C programmer can easily determine:

int DD()
{
  int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
  if (Halt_Status)
    HERE: goto HERE;
  return Halt_Status;
}

HHH(DD) simulates DD that calls HHH(DD) to do this
again and again until HHH figures out what is up.

You HHH(DD) gets it wrong. Even for a simple program. Sigh. Try to fuzz
it for fun?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2