[dugidugout]

Because validity doesn't depend on meaning. Take the classic example: "What is north of the North Pole?". This is a valid phrasing of a question, but is meaningless without extra context about spherical geometry. The trick question in reference is similar in that its intended meaning is contained entirely in the LLM output.

[simondotau]

There's nothing syntactically meaningless about wanting your car washed.

[dugidugout]

I wasn't under the impression anyone was discussing car washing.

[simondotau]

>>>>>>> Still fails the car wash question

>>>>>> Remarkable, since the goal is clearly stated

>>>>> Well it is...non-sensical...the car is already at the car wash

>>>> How is the [car wash] question nonsensical?

>>> Because validity doesn't depend on meaning.

>> There's nothing syntactically meaningless about wanting your car washed.

> I wasn't under the impression anyone was discussing car washing.

Maybe you replied to the wrong post by mistake?

[dugidugout]

I was not replying to your remark, but rather, a later comment regarding the "validity" vs "sensibility". I don't see where I made any distinction concerning wanting to wash cars.

But now I suppose I'll engage your remark. The question is clearly a trick in any interpretive frame I can imagine. You are treating the prompt as a coherent reality which it isn't. The query is essentially a logical null-set. Any answer the AI provides is merely an attempt to bridge that void through hallucinated context and certainly has nothing to do with a genuine desire to wash your car.

[simondotau]

I wasn't under the impression anyone was discussing "genuine desire".

[dugidugout]

It isn't clear you wish to discuss anything with me at all. Why do you seem to be feigning as much?