Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Copyright for "simulating halt decider" by Olcott for many years
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2025 22:46:36 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <23aa0cb632251e2f996771c596259861d785c8ef@i2pn2.org>
References: <vptlfu$3st19$9@dont-email.me> <vpug3h$50td$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq06al$eljf$1@dont-email.me> <vq06ja$dfve$2@dont-email.me>
 <vq075c$eljf$3@dont-email.me> <vq08gi$f06n$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq0b4u$f3k3$4@dont-email.me> <vq0crn$fhth$2@dont-email.me>
 <vq0dl2$f3k3$10@dont-email.me> <3hg7sjhnq962dnkue9cg8ftccfbsf7rpfd@4ax.com>
 <fbc1c3d5507d1d175bdadbbfde51c10bdda1b437@i2pn2.org>
 <vq19ae$nkcf$1@dont-email.me> <vq1pbq$q7t4$1@dont-email.me>
 <31a0412e2970684ae378d18a273cc8e0edf4824a@i2pn2.org>
 <vq35tr$11qv8$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2025 03:46:36 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2590635"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vq35tr$11qv8$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4055
Lines: 80

On 3/2/25 9:59 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/2/2025 6:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 3/2/25 9:18 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/2/2025 3:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-03-02 07:45:26 +0000, joes said:
>>>>
>>>>> Am Sun, 02 Mar 2025 02:28:14 +0000 schrieb Mr Flibble:
>>>>>> Stop stealing my idea: it is Copyright 2022 Mr Flibble.
>>>>> May I note that useless or wrong ideas are not patentable.
>>>>
>>>> No patent was claimed, only copyright. But copyright does not 
>>>> protect ideas,
>>>> only particular presentations of those ideas, to some extent.
>>>>
>>>
>>> For example the term "simulating halt decider" and
>>> "simulating termination analyzer" have been copyrighted
>>> by me for many years. I do this to establish academic
>>> credit for these underlying ideas.
>>>
>>
>> Can't be, You can't "Copyright" words, only creative works.
>>
>> Your papers on the topic can be, but not the terms.
>>
>> Terms can be protected under "Trademark", but that has a cost to 
>> register, and also you have to show a comercial purpose, and can't be 
>> just an ordinary term of art that describes your thing.
>>
>> So, if you paid a lawyer to actually copyright the terms, you wasted 
>> money and got had. Just like if some lawyer suggested that you could 
>> get a copyright on such a term.
>>
>>
> 
> That every reference to the term "simulating halt decider"
> in a Google search pulls up pages and pages of me establishes
> that I am the creator of the notion of a "simulating halt decider"

Nope, just that you don;t understand what you are talking about.

That it is in the literature from over half a century ago just proves 
you didn't create the idea.

You may have created that exact name, but not the concept.

Note, you didn't say anything about how you are LYING about having a 
"Copyright" on that name/concept, maybe because you realize you don't 
know what you are talking about.

> 
> that correctly determines that DD correctly emulated by HHH
> cannot possibly reach its own "return" instruction and
> terminate normally.

Excpet that is a lying strawman, proving you are just a stupid fraud.

> 
> typedef void (*ptr)();
> int HHH(ptr P);
> 
> int DD()
> {
>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>    if (Halt_Status)
>      HERE: goto HERE;
>    return Halt_Status;
> }
> 
> int main()
> {
>    HHH(DD);
> }
> 
> 
> 

Which fails to meet the definition of a program, proving you are just 
too stupid to understand what you are talking about.

You are also too stupid to undetstand your stupidity,