> EDIT: As noted in a subthread, I outclevered myself and also a bunch of human commentators, as the problem I proposed doesn't have a solution and neither ChatGPT, I, and also other presumably human commentators correctly identified that -- I had everything eat something, and the normal wolf/sheep/cabbage of course has the cabbage eating nothing.
Though doesn't that prove the point that it's just pattern-matching? If it was actually reasoning, it wouldn't have provided a "solution" to an unsolvable question.
Though doesn't that prove the point that it's just pattern-matching? If it was actually reasoning, it wouldn't have provided a "solution" to an unsolvable question.