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: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 11:09:28 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <v43nvo$3at9r$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v3j20v$3gm10$2@dont-email.me> <J_CdnTaA96jxpcD7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <87h6eamkgf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v3kcdj$3stk9$1@dont-email.me> <v3kjs9$3u7ng$1@dont-email.me> <v3l16f$5d3$4@dont-email.me> <v3mj84$bq2d$1@dont-email.me> <v3njiv$gatu$9@dont-email.me> <v3p37n$sb6j$1@dont-email.me> <v3poj0$v133$6@dont-email.me> <v3rvri$1ervp$1@dont-email.me> <v3sene$1gra7$10@dont-email.me> <v3sjer$1i8m9$1@dont-email.me> <v3sjvt$1i9ju$2@dont-email.me> <v3u8vq$1v5pb$1@dont-email.me> <v3v4bi$22vrk$7@dont-email.me> <v3vshp$3ao52$6@i2pn2.org> <v401ga$28q9r$1@dont-email.me> <v40sqs$2gclk$1@dont-email.me> <v41jk7$2jqdk$6@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2024 10:09:29 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9d788d897b9449313072d75e3661630c";
	logging-data="3503419"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18yEJftnqBZho6nZF4qC+N4"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Klnrr8s8YWq6MYuhTGk9LedSMKA=
Bytes: 3413

On 2024-06-08 12:42:47 +0000, olcott said:

> On 6/8/2024 1:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-06-07 22:27:22 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 6/7/2024 4:02 PM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Fri, 07 Jun 2024 09:09:54 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 6/7/2024 1:22 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-06-06 15:18:21 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> All halt deciders are only allowed to report on the actual behavior of
>>>>> their actual input.
>>>  >
>>>> Required even! And if they simulate, that simulation must match the
>>>> behaviour.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The most persistent false assumption that cannot possibly
>>> be corrected without expertise in the x86 programming language.
>>> Some people here have that.
>> 
>> Not true. An expert of simulation and simulators need not know
>> anything about x86. If you cannot correct a false assumption
>> about simulations without expertise in the x86 programming language
>> then you cannot correct it with that expertise, either.
> 
> Basically you are admitting that you don't have what it takes
> and trying to incorrect get away with sating that it doesn't matter.

I do know but that is not relevant to this discussion.

> People that know C have been able to understand this too.

I do know C, at least older versions. But that is not relevant,
either.

> For people that are stuck in rebuttal mode I must make it as
> precise as arithmetic so rebuttal looks ridiculously foolish.

Roughly so. Otherwise people who are not stuck in rebuttal mode
will look ridiculously foolish.

> This did work on Richard. He went from denying what I said
> with the strawman deception to saying that he never said it
> was incorrect.

It does not really matter whether your straw man and other
deceptions are incorrect. Being a deception is incorrect
enough.

The easiest way to avoid lying about other people is to
say nothing about them.

-- 
Mikko