Path: ...!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: The actual truth is that ...
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:22:50 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 126
Message-ID: <vebmta$3nqde$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ve39pb$24k00$1@dont-email.me>
 <39f1a350cac0a8431753486526da1c35f458df65@i2pn2.org>
 <ve6lsa$207d$2@news.muc.de> <ve8289$336c8$1@dont-email.me>
 <ve91hf$1ab4$1@news.muc.de>
 <7959253e834d2861b27ab7b3881619c2017e199f.camel@gmail.com>
 <ve9ju2$3ar6j$1@dont-email.me>
 <a965e0f825570212334deda4a92cd7489c33c687@i2pn2.org>
 <vea0mi$3cg0k$2@dont-email.me>
 <a4d0f7ff8798ce118247147d7d0385028ae44168@i2pn2.org>
 <veb557$3lbkf$2@dont-email.me>
 <2e6d8fc76e4e70decca1df44f49b338e61cc557e@i2pn2.org>
 <vebchp$3m87o$1@dont-email.me>
 <1071eb58637e27c9b2b99052ddb14701a147d23a@i2pn2.org>
 <vebeu2$3mp5v$1@dont-email.me>
 <58fef4e221da8d8bc3c274b9ee4d6b7b5dd82990@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 19:22:50 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="45d09d337d8f7f50056d122f5780fe20";
	logging-data="3926446"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18UhY7nPhnt3EQKqTz/CGFC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9wssm4cBpCOtw4mLqnXPC8D7vXc=
In-Reply-To: <58fef4e221da8d8bc3c274b9ee4d6b7b5dd82990@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6606

On 10/11/2024 12:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/11/24 11:06 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/11/2024 9:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/11/24 10:26 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/11/2024 8:05 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 10/11/24 8:19 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/11/2024 6:04 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/10/24 9:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2024 8:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/24 6:19 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2024 2:26 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 17:05 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:34:34 +0000, Alan Mackenzie said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/8/24 8:49 AM, Andy Walker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... after a short break.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      Richard -- no-one sane carries on an extended 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone they [claim to] consider a "stupid liar".  So 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which are you?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not sane?  Or stupid enough to try to score points off 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone who is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incapable of conceding them?  Or lying when you describe 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Peter? You
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> must surely have better things to do.  Meanwhile, you 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surely noticed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Peter is running rings around you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, you don't understand the concept of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defense of the truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe, but continuously calling your debating opponent a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> liar, and doing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so in oversized upper case, goes beyond truth and comes 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perilously close
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to stalking.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Calling a liar a liar is fully justified. I don't know how 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> often it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs be done but readers of a liar may want to know that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reading a liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We know Peter Olcott has lied in things that matter. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I believe
>>>>>>>>>>>> his continual falsehoods are more a matter of delusion than 
>>>>>>>>>>>> mendacity.
>>>>>>>>>>>> As Mike Terry has said, OP's intellectual capacity is low. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Calling him
>>>>>>>>>>>> a liar in virtually every post is, I think, unwarranted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It detracts from the substance of your posts, and makes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them, for me at least, thoroughly unpleasant to read.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You probably needn't read them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As I said, I mostly don't - which is a pity, since Richard 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Damon often
>>>>>>>>>>>> posts stuff worth reading.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As soon you find out that they repeat the same over and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> over, neither
>>>>>>>>>>>>> correcting their substantial errors nor improving their 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> arguments you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have read enough.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mikko
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> olcott deliberately lies (he knows what is told, he choose to 
>>>>>>>>>>> distort). olcott
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When the behavior of DDD emulated by HHH is the measure then:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But since it isn't, your whole argument falls apart.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ah a breakthrough.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And an admission that you are just working on a lie.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps you are unaware of how valid deductive inference works.
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can disagree that the premise to my reasoning is true.
>>>>>> By changing my premise as the basis of your rebuttal you
>>>>>> commit the strawman error.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, how do you get from the DEFINITION of Halting being a behavior 
>>>>> of the actual machine, to something that can be talked about by a 
>>>>> PARTIAL emulation with a different final behavior.
>>>>
>>>> My whole point in this thread is that it is incorrect
>>>> for you to say that my reasoning is invalid on the basis
>>>> that you do not agree with one of my premises.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The issue isn't that your premise is "incorrect", but it is INVALID, 
>>> as it is based on the redefinition of fundamental words.
>>>
>>
>> Premises cannot be invalid.
>>
> 
> Of course they can be invalid, 

*It is a verified fact that you are clueless about this*

    It is important to stress that the premises
    of an argument do not have actually to be
    true in order for the argument to be valid.
https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/


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