XPost: comp.theory, comp.lang.c++   
   From: chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/27/2025 8:22 AM, olcott wrote:   
   > On 10/27/2025 10:17 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:   
   >> olcott  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?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)