Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!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 19:08:44 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <fd8bf90393a5bcb10f7913da9081421637262590@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> <vg09p2$2kq69$1@dont-email.me>
 <vg0a9h$2op6r$1@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 23:08:45 -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: <vg0a9h$2op6r$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3422
Lines: 42

On 10/31/24 12:12 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/31/2024 11:03 AM, Andy Walker wrote:
>> On 31/10/2024 11:01, 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.
>>
>>      It's not exactly polite to describe Peter in any of these ways!
>> Entirely personally, I see no reason to do so in any case.  He is quite
>> often impolite in response to being called a "stupid liar" or similar,
>> but that's understandable.  He is no worse than many a student in terms
>> of what he comprehends;  his fault lies in [apparently] believing that he
>> has a unique insight. 
> 
> When what I say is viewed within the perspective of
> the philosophy of computation I do have new insight.
> 
> When what I say is viewed within the assumption that
> the current received view of the theory of computation
> is inherently infallible then what I say can only be
> viewed as incorrect.

So, are you willing to state that you are admitting that nothing you 
might come up with has any bearing on the original halting problem 
because you are working in a new framework?

> 
>> I have no reason to believe that he lies [versus
>> being profoundly mistaken];  YMMV.  His real problem is that he cannot
>> [or will not] resist responding to any article here, very probably inc
>> this one.  He is apparently not alone, which is what generates the flood
>> of articles.  There is a simple way to avoid that.
>>
> 
> 
>