[emmender1]

LLMs are failing on tasks as simple as this. you can call it a trick question but what the hey.

"prove that there are no non negative numbers less than 3"

Claude puts out this elaborate BS - whats funny is the pretension.

----

This is trivial to prove by contradiction:

Assume there exists a non-negative number n < 3. Then either:

n = 0. But 0 is not less than 3, so this is a contradiction. 0 < n < 3. But the only numbers between 0 and 3 are 1 and 2, and neither of those are less than 3, so this is also a contradiction. Therefore, our assumption that such an n exists must be false. By contradiction, there are no non-negative numbers less than 3.

In formal logical terms:

Assume ∃n ∈ R, n ≥ 0 and n < 3 (There exists some non-negative number n less than 3) Then either: a) n = 0. But 0 ≥ 3 is false, so this is a contradiction. b) 0 < n < 3. The only numbers in (0,3) are 1 and 2, neither of which is less than 3, so this is also a contradiction. Therefore the assumption in (1) must be false. By contradiction, the statement ∀n ∈ R, n ≥ 0 → n ≥ 3 (For all non-negative numbers n, n is greater than or equal to 3) must be true. So the proof by contradiction shows that there are no non-negative numbers less than 3.

----

boosters can hype all you want, but the damn thing cant compute. and please dont say - "but most humans will fail at this too"

meanwhile...: claude-coders working furiously to add this test case - lol.

[famouswaffles]

I swear, these kind of gotchas are the most stupid. Because they are easily resolved by just talking to the current state of the art.

https://chat.openai.com/share/93324013-b333-44ef-b8c8-5460cb...

[emmender1]

ok, here you go. another slight tweak to a standard puzzle and it falls.

btw, i am very impressed with how well chatGPT does on this puzzle thanks to the elaborate tuning that seems to have been done by the training.

--- A farmer has a wolf, a goat, and some cabbage - and he must cross a river by boat with his items. The boat can carry only the farmer and a single item. If left unattended together, wolf would eat the cabbage, or the wolf would eat the goat or the goat would eat the cabbage. How can they cross the river without anything being eaten? ---

To ensure that nothing gets eaten during the river crossing, the farmer can follow these steps:

Step 1: The farmer takes the goat across the river and leaves it on the other side.

On the other side: Farmer | Goat On the original side: Wolf | Cabbage Step 2: The farmer returns alone to the original side.

On the other side: Goat On the original side: Farmer | Wolf | Cabbage Step 3: The farmer takes the cabbage across the river.

On the other side: Farmer | Cabbage On the original side: Wolf | Goat Step 4: The farmer leaves the cabbage on the other side and takes the wolf back across the river.

On the other side: Cabbage On the original side: Farmer | Wolf | Goat Step 5: The farmer takes the wolf across the river.

On the other side: Wolf | Cabbage On the original side: Farmer | Goat Step 6: The farmer returns alone to the original side.

On the other side: Wolf On the original side: Farmer | Goat | Cabbage Now, all three items (wolf, goat, cabbage) and the farmer have safely crossed the river without anything being eaten.

---

[jeremysalwen]

GPT4 understands that it's an odd variation of the classic puzzle, and that its unsolvable. (This conversation is my first attempt) https://chat.openai.com/share/5fe4f781-ea18-41ae-8ff9-349a31...

[optimalsolver]

Will AI skeptics ever get tired of being BTFO by stochastic parrots?

Gary Marcus' Twitter timeline suggests not.