Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Respect [was: The halting problem as defined is a category error]
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 08:39:24 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <105knas$2p5ej$1@dont-email.me>
References: <105bdps$1g61u$1@dont-email.me> <105c0lk$1k7ip$1@dont-email.me>
 <105c22v$1k9r9$3@dont-email.me> <105c5rt$1l4j7$1@dont-email.me>
 <105cddu$1r7mi$1@dont-email.me> <105e259$26kvp$1@dont-email.me>
 <105h115$ghr$1@news.muc.de> <105h23i$2uj5e$2@dont-email.me>
 <105i6of$2ki5n$1@dont-email.me> <105j0oc$3cagp$8@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 06:39:27 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="18a3a8f1335c0ab9d7d12f40e528924c";
	logging-data="2921939"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18cqFsv6L2kdCJzPhEiivZn"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Cf1KuzjSureEyb48oAgy812qoUI=
Content-Language: nl, en-GB
In-Reply-To: <105j0oc$3cagp$8@dont-email.me>

Op 20.jul.2025 om 17:07 schreef olcott:
> On 7/20/2025 2:44 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 19.jul.2025 om 23:18 schreef olcott:
>>> On 7/19/2025 4:00 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>> Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [ .... ]
>>>>
>>>>> ps. learn to post more respectfully.
>>>>
>>>> You've hit the nail on the head, there.  Peter Olcott doesn't show
>>>> respect here for anybody.  Because of this he isn't shown any respect
>>>> back - he hasn't earned any.  I don't think he understands the concept
>>>> of respect any more than he understands the concept of truth.
>>>>
>>>> If he were to show repect, he'd repect knowledge, truth, and learning,
>>>> and strive to acquire these qualities.  Instead he displays contempt 
>>>> for
>>>> them.  This is a large part of what makes him a crank.  It is
>>>> a large part of what makes it such a waste of time trying to correct
>>>> him, something that you've sensibly given up.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Now that chat bots have proven that they understand
>>> what I am saying I can rephrase my words to be more
>>> clear.
>>
>> Chat-boxes prove that reasoning with invalid presumptions lead to 
>> invalid conclusions.
>>
>>>
>>> I have been rude because I cannot interpret the
>>> rebuttal to this statement as anything besides
>>> a despicable lie for the sole purpose of sadistic
>>> pleasure of gaslighting:
>>>
>>> <input to chat bots>
>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>
>>> void DDD()
>>> {
>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>    return;
>>> }
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>    DDD();
>>> }
>>>
>>> Termination Analyzer HHH simulates its input until
>>> it detects a non-terminating behavior pattern. When
>>> HHH detects such a pattern it aborts its simulation
>>> and returns 0.
>>> </input to chat bots>
>>
>> We see the invalid presumption in the input. There is no non- 
>> termination behaviour in the input. 
> You can see that I did not even hint at non
> termination of the input
??? We read that '... until it detects non-termination pattern' and 
'When HHH detects such a pattern ...' before the '</input'
Since these presumptions are never happen, all conclusions based on it 
are invalid as well.