Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: Is Richard a Liar?
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 19:27:47 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <v280i3$298vl$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v1k381$14mbi$2@dont-email.me> <v1labh$kf53$1@i2pn2.org> <v1lfnq$1e7af$1@dont-email.me> <v1lh1g$kf52$4@i2pn2.org> <v1lmo1$1g1mj$1@dont-email.me> <v1luu1$lbo5$3@i2pn2.org> <v1lvuo$1i47i$1@dont-email.me> <v1m1bf$lbo5$4@i2pn2.org> <v1m2hc$1ijhr$1@dont-email.me> <v1m31m$lbo4$1@i2pn2.org> <v1m4et$1iv85$1@dont-email.me> <v1m5co$lbo4$2@i2pn2.org> <v1m71h$1jnpi$1@dont-email.me> <v1m7mh$lbo5$5@i2pn2.org> <v1mb8f$1kgpl$1@dont-email.me> <v1mkf8$lbo5$7@i2pn2.org> <v1mkmm$1q5ee$1@dont-email.me> <v1o67n$24f4c$1@dont-email.me> <v1vslr$7enr$1@dont-email.me> <v1vuor$24b2$1@news.muc.de> <v200u2$8dd9$1@dont-email.me> <v202k0$8q16$1@dont-email.me> <v20654$9o07$1@dont-email.me> <v2086v$a4tr$1@dont-email.me> <v208db$a6jn$1@dont-email.me> <v20ak6$an12$1@dont-email.me> <v20b6v$akk9$1@dont-email.me> <v20cf4$11h4n$3@i2pn2.org> <v20ect$bki0$1@dont-email.me> <v22j90$u8vi$4@dont-email.me> <v24iou$1fskq$1@dont-email.me> <v2592p$1kspo$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 18:27:48 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3cb15e80158a0930411d19a499ee95a9";
	logging-data="2401269"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19zDLz5BLUj3pFZMyxDVEfk"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XMKG7a5ob7b+ocYX3MBb1mI3iSU=
Bytes: 5286

On 2024-05-16 15:34:48 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/16/2024 4:14 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-05-15 15:10:24 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 5/15/2024 3:17 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-05-14 19:34:52 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> *Anyone that says that I am wrong without knowing C is dishonest*
>>>> 
>>>> First you should prove that you know C.
>>> 
>>> Not at all. Not in the least. Deductive proofs cannot rely
>>> on an argument from authority.
>> 
>> True but irrelevant. When someone sayes you are wrong, that does not
>> refer to any deductive proofs as you haven't presented deductive
>> proofs.
> 
> None-the-less a single-valid-counter-example would prove that
> I am wrong thus any claim that I am wrong lacking this required
> valid counter-example is empty rhetoric entirely bereft of any
> supporting reasoning: (EREBOASR).

Wrong, as explained above. More specifically, the word "thus" is
false.

> Repeatedly claiming that I am wrong without providing the required
> counter-example when this counter-example is repeatedly requested
> (and categorically impossible) does meet the standard of a reckless
> disregard for the truth.

There is nothing wrong in a repeated truth. Moreover, a disagreement
is not any disregrad for the truth. As being wrong is not a sin or
crime (at least in työical cases) saying that you are wrong may or
may not be a crime, depending on the laws of the place and time.

>> In particular, what you said above isn't a deductive proof
>> but an attempt to refute deductive proofs and other counter arguments
>> with an ad hominem fallacy.
>> 
>>> Anyone that knows C and claims that I am wrong either provides
>>> the required single valid counter-example proving that I am
>>> wrong or meets the
>>> 
>>> https://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/reckless-disregard-of-the-truth.html
>>> 
>>> of defamation cases.
>> 
>> Saying that you are wrong hardly couts as defamation. Perhaps saying
> 
> Repeatedly saying that I am wrong and calling me a liar when it
> is categorically impossible that I am wrong IS DEFAMATION.

That may vary, as does whether defamation is a crime.

> *One instance of H/D has been fully operational software*
> *under Windows and Linux for two years*
> 
> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr x);
> 01 int D(ptr x)
> 02 {
> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> 04   if (Halt_Status)
> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
> 06   return Halt_Status;
> 07 }
> 08
> 09 int main()
> 10 {
> 11   H(D,D);
> 12   return 0;
> 13 }
> 
> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly
> emulates at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order
> specified by the x86 instructions of D.
> 
> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of
> H in the order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus
> calling H(D,D) in recursive simulation.
> 
> Any H/D pair matching the above template where
> D(D) is simulated by the same H(D,D) that it calls
> cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
> This is a simple software engineering verified fact.

Every D(D) of the above pattern reaches the line 03 and if
H is a decider it reaches the line 04, too. Whether H(D,D)
simulates that far (or at all) is a feature of H that is not
shown in the C code above.

About being a simple software engineering verified fact,
who is the simple software engineer who vefrified it?

-- 
Mikko