Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 11:59:26 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <v8519e$3s7bv$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v80h07$2su8m$3@dont-email.me> <0amdndFJSZSzYD77nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <v8102f$2vo8u$1@dont-email.me> <v83fhe$3gihn$1@dont-email.me> <v83hmk$3gvj7$1@dont-email.me> <v83jc9$3gihm$1@dont-email.me> <v83juc$3ham9$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 10:59:26 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1e2c5978fba8d101c2f8131c12c4214d";
	logging-data="4070783"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX189bkjQGte1EKvW3zyaSW94"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8i6+xVEHcnLE6yxyvRTafPr3XCQ=
Bytes: 4003

On 2024-07-27 20:05:31 +0000, olcott said:

> On 7/27/2024 2:55 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 27.jul.2024 om 21:27 schreef olcott:
>>> On 7/27/2024 1:50 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 26.jul.2024 om 22:14 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 7/26/2024 2:46 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>>> On 26/07/2024 16:56, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> This is meant for Mike, Joes and Fred don't have the technical 
>>>>>>> competence to understand it.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Richard might be able to understand it yet the fact that he is
>>>>>>> stuck in rebuttal mode makes any understanding that he may have
>>>>>>> utterly useless.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Mike: It seems that HHH has been a pure function of its inputs
>>>>>>> and never has provided data downward to its slaves that corrupts
>>>>>>> their halt status decision. They don't even make a halt status
>>>>>>> decision thus cannot make a corrupted one.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Well, the first two claims are literally untrue - outer HHH effectively 
>>>>>> uses the static mutable data to pass flags to the inner HHH that modify 
>>>>>> its behaviour.  The Root flag below is derived from the actual static 
>>>>>> data and causes inner HHH to totally skip its own abort logic!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> You seem to acknowledge this, but claim it does not matter for various 
>>>>>> reasons, because whatever mistakes you are making, what finally gets 
>>>>>> printed out is saying the right thing!
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> If HHH gets the correct answer in an impure way then it only
>>>>> counts that it gets it in an impure way if it is impossible
>>>>> to get in a pure way. This makes it possible for HHH to get
>>>>> this answer in a pure way:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Message-ID: <rLmcnQQ3-N_tvH_4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
>>>>> On 3/1/2024 12:41 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>>  >
>>>>>  > Obviously a simulator has access to the internal state
>>>>>  > (tape contents etc.) of the simulated machine. No problem there.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Mike Terry is right that a simulator has access to the internal state 
>>>> of the simulated machine, but he did not say that it is correct to 
>>>> *change in this way* the state of the simulated machine.
>>>> Changing the state of the simulated machine is cheating.
>>> 
>>> I know this and agree with him on this.
>>> 
>>>> Of course a simulator can modify the input before of during the simulation.
>>> 
>>> No that is cheating too.
>> 
>> That is exactly what you do when you change the value of the variable 
>> 'Root'. 'Root' is a hidden input for HHH.
> 
> If you had sufficient understanding of the x86 language
> you would know that DDD is correctly emulated by HHH.

If you had suffient understanding of x86 language and correctness
you would know that DDD is incorrectly emnulated by HHH.

-- 
Mikko