[leereeves]

That is true, but GPT-4 wrote:

> The second logician hears the first one's answer and concludes that the first logician must want a drink, because if he didn't, he would have said "no"

> The third logician hears both answers and realizes that since neither of the first two said "no," they both must want a drink.

IOW, when asked the puzzle with "anyone", it repeated the explanation for "all", which seems to support the hypothesis that even GPT-4 is still just a "stochastic parrot" repeating what it sees and unable to reason about slight variations.