Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Semantic
 Property of Finite String
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:03:54 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <869a026c49817611d8564b32236c86a5a8cc1bbb@i2pn2.org>
References: <vqntaq$1jut5$1@dont-email.me> <vqp388$1tvqa$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqpdv9$202b2$2@dont-email.me> <vqperb$20c9k$2@dont-email.me>
 <E6mcnWv3nMa66036nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <vqs2n8$2knng$1@dont-email.me>
 <5429f6c8b8a8a79e06b4aeefe677cc54a2a636bf@i2pn2.org>
 <vqt9jp$2spcd$6@dont-email.me> <vqtag4$2t2hb$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqtgl0$2u7fo$1@dont-email.me>
 <924e22fc46d629b311b16a954dd0bed980a0a094@i2pn2.org>
 <vqvg7s$3s1qt$3@dont-email.me> <vqvgb4$3kfru$5@dont-email.me>
 <vqvspf$59su$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 03:03:54 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="82239"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vqvspf$59su$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3548
Lines: 65

On 3/13/25 8:21 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/13/2025 3:48 PM, dbush wrote:
>> On 3/13/2025 4:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/13/2025 4:27 AM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Wed, 12 Mar 2025 21:41:34 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 3/12/2025 7:56 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/12/2025 8:41 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NOT WHEN IT IS STIPULATED THAT THE BEHAVIOR BEING MEASURED IS
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The direct execution of DDD
>>>>>
>>>>> is proven to be different than the behavior of DDD emulated by HHH
>>>>> according to the semantics of the x86 language.
>>>>
>>>> Which is weird, considering that a simulator should produce the same
>>>> behaviour.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> DECIDERS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT ON THE SEMANTIC OR SYNTACTIC 
>>>>> PROPERTY OF
>>>>> THEIR INPUT FINITE STRINGS.
>>>> And not if the input called a different simulator that didn't abort.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Replacing the code of HHH with an unconditional simulator and 
>>> subsequently running HHH(DD) cannot possibly
>>> reach its own final state no matter what HHH
>>> does.
>>>
>>> Replacing the code of HHH1 with an unconditional simulator and 
>>> subsequently running HHH1(DD) does reach its
>>> own final state.
>>>
>>> If someone was not a liar they would say that
>>> these are different computations.
>>>
>>
>> Only because one changes the code that DD runs and one doesn't
> 
> *Changing my quoted words is dishonest*

And thus you demonstrate that YOU are the dishonest one.

The fact that you admit that you have changed fundamental core 
definition of terms-of-art while still claiming to be working in the 
system is really just an admissition that you are nothing but a lying fraud.


> 
> On 3/13/2025 3:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>  >
>  > DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
>  > reach its own final state no matter what HHH
>  > does.
>  >
>  > DDD correctly emulated by HHH1 does reach its
>  > own final state.
>  >
>  > If someone was not a liar they would say that
>  > these are different computations.
>  >
> 
> Thus showing that you are a liar.
>