Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v8fe66$22ksu$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!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: No decider is ever accountable for the behavior of the computation that itself is contained within Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 10:40:54 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 53 Message-ID: <v8fe66$22ksu$1@dont-email.me> References: <v80irs$2tlb5$1@dont-email.me> <v828ju$3a1gf$1@dont-email.me> <v82vpu$3dftr$6@dont-email.me> <v8506m$3s27b$1@dont-email.me> <v88g60$i7kl$5@dont-email.me> <v8a2ql$u68g$1@dont-email.me> <v8bsgc$184u7$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2024 09:40:54 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cf6c3700573d19c81f9562406f33b929"; logging-data="2184094"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18SI7VsgBWiC7oFFtxNJvi5" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:uxTLXeRaT6ZMwQ/w1A0H7sFuBF8= Bytes: 3020 On 2024-07-30 23:20:43 +0000, olcott said: > On 7/30/2024 1:56 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-07-29 16:32:00 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 7/28/2024 3:40 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>> On 2024-07-27 14:21:50 +0000, olcott said: >>>> >>>>> On 7/27/2024 2:46 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>> On 2024-07-26 16:28:43 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> >>>>>>> No decider is ever accountable for the behavior of the >>>>>>> computation that itself is contained within. >>>>>> >>>>>> That claim is fully unjustified. How do you even define "accountable" >>>>>> in the context of computations, automata, and deciders? >>>>> >>>>> int sum(int x, int y){ return x + y; } >>>>> sum(5,6) is not accountable for reporting sum(3,2). >>>> >>>> That claim is fully unjustified. How do you even define "accountable" >>>> in the context of computations, automata, and deciders? >>>> >>>>> It computes the mapping from its input to the value of their sum. >>>> >>>> That's obvious but is it relevant? >>>> >>>>> HHH must compute the mapping from its input finite string >>>>> of the x86 machine code of DDD to the behavior that this >>>>> finite string specifies and then report on the halt status >>>>> of this behavior. >>>> >>>> Now is that relevant? >>> >>> Halt deciders report the halt status on the basis >>> of the behavior that a finite string input specifies. >> >> How is that relevant? > > Computable functions are the formalized analogue of the intuitive > notion of algorithms, in the sense that a function is computable if > there exists an algorithm that can do the job of the function, i.e. > *given an* *input of the function domain it can return the > corresponding output* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_function How is that relevant? The question is still unanswered. Apparently the answer is "no way" or an answer would already be given. -- Mikko