Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs ---
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:39:17 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <v3kkil$3ub7h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v362eu$2d367$3@i2pn2.org> <v363js$vg63$2@dont-email.me> <v36803$2d368$3@i2pn2.org> <v368je$100kd$3@dont-email.me> <v373mr$2d367$5@i2pn2.org> <v37bpa$15n0b$1@dont-email.me> <v37i9p$lls$1@news.muc.de> <87y17smqnq.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v37sap$18mfo$1@dont-email.me> <v3elpv$2mjca$1@dont-email.me> <v3fdif$2r6gg$1@dont-email.me> <v3h9af$3974i$1@dont-email.me> <v3htmb$3bkv5$7@dont-email.me> <v3k50f$3rlk8$1@dont-email.me> <v3kfos$3t5s5$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2024 16:39:17 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0724530065624955e856c446f16213de";
	logging-data="4140273"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+TYyYrdyxmvlI/F0Ra4aAP"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ruj3v5Az8ayjeAg7HoaBJNyFTJY=
Bytes: 4977

On 2024-06-03 13:17:16 +0000, olcott said:

> On 6/3/2024 5:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-06-02 13:56:27 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 6/2/2024 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-06-01 15:09:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 6/1/2024 3:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-05-29 18:31:52 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> *two dozen people were simply wrong*
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Why are people who are wrong so important that they deserve
>>>>>> a subject line? I would think that people who are right are
>>>>>> more interesting.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is the key mistake of the definition of the halting problem itself.
>>>>> Linz makes this same mistake. I already covered this extensively in
>>>>> another reply.
>>>> 
>>>> The word "this" above does not denote anything so the first sentence
>>>> does not mean anything. The word "same" in the second sentence refers
>>>> to "this" in the first sentnece and therefore does not denote, either,
>>>> so the second sentence does not say anything either. So the third
>>>> sentence says that you covevered nothing.
>>>> 
>>>>> That these two dozen different people are wrong about this shows that
>>>>> the only basis for any rebuttal of my proof for the last three years IS
>>>>> WRONG.
>>>> 
>>>> That you claim that these two dozen people are wrong does not show
>>>> anything. It probably wouldn't even if you could show that they
>>>> really were wrong.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The only one that I am aware that is not wrong about the behavior
>>> that a simulating halt decider must report on is myself.
>> 
>> A single exception to a general trend can be an observation error.
>> From a single case it is not safe to infer anything other than
>> more more observations are needed.
>> 
>>> Only software engineers will understand that DD correctly simulated
>>> by HH had different behavior than DD(DD). Comp Sci people allow Comp Sci
>>> dogma to overrule verified facts.
>> 
>> Software engineers know that the given specifications override their
>> opinions.
>> 
>> They also know that it is not the program's responsibility to meet
>> the specifactions but software (and other) engineers'.
>> 
> 
> Repeat until correct rebuttal.
> DD correctly emulated by any HH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT
> DD correctly emulated by any HH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT
> DD correctly emulated by any HH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT
> 
> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
> 00       int HH(ptr p, ptr i);
> 01       int DD(ptr p)
> 02       {
> 03         int Halt_Status = HH(p, p);
> 04         if (Halt_Status)
> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
> 06         return Halt_Status;
> 07       }
> 
> _DD()
> [00001c22] 55         push ebp
> [00001c23] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [00001c25] 51         push ecx
> [00001c26] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00001c29] 50         push eax        ; push DD 1c22
> [00001c2a] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [00001c2d] 51         push ecx        ; push DD 1c22
> [00001c2e] e80ff7ffff call 00001342   ; call HH
> [00001c33] 83c408     add esp,+08
> [00001c36] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax
> [00001c39] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
> [00001c3d] 7402       jz 00001c41
> [00001c3f] ebfe       jmp 00001c3f
> [00001c41] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04]
> [00001c44] 8be5       mov esp,ebp
> [00001c46] 5d         pop ebp
> [00001c47] c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0038) [00001c47]

Nice to see that you don't see any need to disagree
but instaed feel that you can safely change the subject.

-- 
Mikko