Path: ...!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: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a
 new basis ---
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 19:08:42 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <9dfb880fdcbd3fb9d00bd0c84ac1d7306a60f843@i2pn2.org>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vflue8$3nvp8$2@i2pn2.org>
 <vfmd8m$k2m7$1@dont-email.me>
 <bcd82d9f8a987d3884220c0df7b8f7204cb9de3e@i2pn2.org>
 <vfmueh$mqn9$1@dont-email.me>
 <ff039b922cabbb6d44f90aa71a52d8c2f446b6ab@i2pn2.org>
 <vfo95k$11qs1$1@dont-email.me> <vfp8c0$3tobi$2@i2pn2.org>
 <vfpbtq$1837o$2@dont-email.me> <vfq4h9$1fo1n$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfqpi3$1iaob$4@dont-email.me> <vfqsng$1gikg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfsadf$1urkc$1@dont-email.me> <vft4kp$23a0h$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfvo2o$2ln20$1@dont-email.me> <vfvump$2mcse$7@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 23:08:42 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="366200"; 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: <vfvump$2mcse$7@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2518
Lines: 30

On 10/31/24 8:54 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/31/2024 6:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-10-30 11:17:45 +0000, Andy Walker said:
>>
>>> On 30/10/2024 03:50, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>>> You may have noticed that the moron responded to your message in
>>>> less than 10 minutes. Do you think he read the material before
>>>> responding? A good troll would have waited a few hours before
>>>> answering.
>>>
>>>     I doubt whether Peter is either a moron or a troll.
>>
>> Does it really matter? If he falsely pretends to be a moron or a liar
>> I may politely pretend to believe.
>>
> 
> That I state the subject of the conversation is:
> [The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new 
> basis ---]
> 
> and you ignore this is not my mistake.
> 

So, are you admitting that any answer you get here has NOTHING To do 
with the halting problem?

That that is a true statment even though your "programs" are the same 
ones that you claimed were "correct hatl deciders" and "correct 
termination analyszers"?