Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis --- TYPO Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 12:55:17 +0200 Organization: - Lines: 96 Message-ID: References: <086fc32f14bcc004466d3128b0fe585b27377399@i2pn2.org> <11408789ed30027f4bc9a743f353dfa9b4712109@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 11:55:18 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b6be8a1756d2017ce1bbdc09eb08928c"; logging-data="2806818"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18O3X99DILruBApE0hqWVYI" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:u0+Q3kjJfHQAhVp4tVqpz9Q6YzM= Bytes: 5385 On 2024-10-31 01:20:40 +0000, Mike Terry said: > On 30/10/2024 23:35, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 10/30/24 8:34 AM, olcott wrote: >>> On 10/30/2024 6:19 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 10/29/24 10:54 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 10/29/2024 5:50 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> On 10/28/24 11:08 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 10/28/2024 9:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 10/28/24 9:09 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 10/28/2024 6:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It is IMPOSSIBLE to emulate DDD per the x86 semantics without the code >>>>>>>>>> for HHH, so it needs to be part of the input. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *You seemed to be a totally Jackass here* >>>>>>>>> You are not that stupid >>>>>>>>> You are not that ignorant >>>>>>>>> and this is not your ADD >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _DDD() >>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD >>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) >>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04 >>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop ebp >>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret >>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> At machine address 0000217a HHH emulates itself emulating >>>>>>>>> DDD without knowing that it is emulating itself. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then how did it convert the call HHH into an emulation of DDD again? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When HHH (unknowingly) emulates itself emulating DDD this >>>>>>> emulated HHH is going to freaking emulate DDD. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Did you think it was going to play poker? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Which is what it would do, get stuck and fail to be a decider. It might >>>>>> figure out that it is emulating an emulating decider, at which point it >>>>>> knows that the decider might choose to abort its conditional emulation >>>>>> to return, so it needs to emulate further. >>>>>> >>>>>> Only by recognizing itself, does it have grounds to say that if I don't >>>>>> abort, it never will, and thus I am stuck, so I need to abort. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Counter-factual. This algorithm has no ability to KNOW ITS OWN CODE. >>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c // page 801 >>>>> >>>>> *That people fail to agree with this and also fail to* >>>>> *correctly point out any error seems to indicate dishonestly* >>>>> *or lack of technical competence* >>>>> >>>>> DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the x86 >>>>> language cannot possibly reach its own "return" instruction >>>>> whether or not any HHH ever aborts its emulation of DDD. >>>>> >>>>> I read, reread again and again to make sure that my understanding >>>>> is correct. You seems to glance at a few words before spouting off a >>>>> canned rebuttal that does not even apply to my words. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No, it knows its own code because it rule for "No conditional branches" >>>> excludes that code. >>>> >>> >>> It does not know its own code. It merely knows that the >>> machine address that it is looking at belongs to the >>> operating system. I simply don't have the fifty labor >>> years that AProVE: Non-Termination Witnesses for C Programs, >>> could spend on handling conditional branches. >>> >>> The stupid aspect on your part is that even knowing >>> that its own code halts THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH >>> DDD REACHING TS OWN RETURN INSTRUCTION. >>> >>> >> >> No, HHH is NOT part of the "Operating System" so your claims are just a lie, > > PO definitely has a deep-rooted problem with his thinking here. What PO does does not look like any thingking but more like what one could expect from ChatgPPT or a similar AI. -- Mikko