Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Even Google AI Overview understands me now --- My Stupid Mistake
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2024 14:05:57 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <vdun2l$1b4or$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vdgpbs$2nmcm$1@dont-email.me> <vdgqhn$2nmcm$2@dont-email.me>
 <7c6cede5237e3eafee262c74dd1a1c90c6b2ffbb@i2pn2.org>
 <vdhblt$2qm1j$2@dont-email.me>
 <cafee8d7a14edd7b1d76bb706c36eef06ae82896@i2pn2.org>
 <vdi0f8$2u1aq$1@dont-email.me>
 <53a60609211a04a123adafa525bac39b5cbc6959@i2pn2.org>
 <vdjlum$38t86$4@dont-email.me>
 <bf681f4404a7df8e3ffc2059dcd7c5c302aeeff1@i2pn2.org>
 <vdkud3$3ipp4$1@dont-email.me> <vdm1tl$3npme$1@dont-email.me>
 <vdn0nv$3sa9k$1@dont-email.me> <vdob4p$5sfp$1@dont-email.me>
 <vdovie$8eot$1@dont-email.me> <vdqsrj$mmcu$1@dont-email.me>
 <vdrafr$oita$1@dont-email.me> <vdtp6o$1710i$1@dont-email.me>
 <vdu0en$17ult$1@dont-email.me>
 <b5bff7b74eac8c4382c49942fbecd95d0fb66c43@i2pn2.org>
 <vdug46$1a56s$2@dont-email.me>
 <2996169ade3affa1d5f573667dafb110aefe86e0@i2pn2.org>
 <vdujcl$1aj6l$1@dont-email.me>
 <01b14b98ee059ac2c3f5cdc56522d6719a1d2d7a@i2pn2.org>
 <vdul3v$1asin$1@dont-email.me>
 <f283a1c15b928ef2c641e60cc5fd7813bef37a0a@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 21:05:58 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8241962fd725da77d4713a73e4f1f7dc";
	logging-data="1413915"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+K8csDrW4DDFu4/YyIGrNO"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rhg/Hkvy8bFPVb+zTtYe0Kch4ys=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <f283a1c15b928ef2c641e60cc5fd7813bef37a0a@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4110

On 10/6/2024 1:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/6/24 2:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/6/2024 1:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/6/24 2:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/6/2024 12:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 10/6/24 1:07 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/6/2024 11:59 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/6/24 8:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH that can possibly
>>>>>>>> exist never returns. Each of these HHH emulators that does
>>>>>>>> return 0 correctly reports the above non-halting behavior.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, the DDD return (if the HHH(DDD) gives an answer), just after 
>>>>>>> the HHH that emulated them gave up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH that can possibly
>>>>>> exist never returns.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH
>>>>>> DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH
>>>>>> DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH
>>>>>> DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH
>>>>>
>>>>> Which, as you have been told but seems to be above your head means 
>>>>> that the execution of DDD, 
>>>>
>>>> gets to ignore the fact that DDD was defined to
>>>> have a pathological relationship with HHH that
>>>> HHH cannot ignore.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, that isn't ignoring it, but taking into account that since HHH is 
>>> defined to be a specific program, it has specific behavior.
>>>
>>
>> The behavior of the executed DDD after the emulated
>> DDD has already been aborted is different than the
>> behavior of the emulated DDD that must be aborted.
> 
> Nope, it is the exact same code on the exact same data, and thus does 
> the exact same behavior.
> 

The execution trace proves that the executed DDD has
different behavior that need not be aborted because
emulated DDD must be an is aborted.

No one can be stupid enough to think that:
MUST BE ABORTED
   is exactly the same as
NEED NOT BE ABORTED

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer