Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 12:40:19 +0200
Organization: -
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <vg2b6j$374jn$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vflue8$3nvp8$2@i2pn2.org> <vfmd8m$k2m7$1@dont-email.me> <bcd82d9f8a987d3884220c0df7b8f7204cb9de3e@i2pn2.org> <vfmueh$mqn9$1@dont-email.me> <ff039b922cabbb6d44f90aa71a52d8c2f446b6ab@i2pn2.org> <vfo95k$11qs1$1@dont-email.me> <vfp8c0$3tobi$2@i2pn2.org> <vfpbtq$1837o$2@dont-email.me> <vfq4h9$1fo1n$1@dont-email.me> <vfqpi3$1iaob$4@dont-email.me> <vfqsng$1gikg$1@dont-email.me> <vfsadf$1urkc$1@dont-email.me> <vft4kp$23a0h$1@dont-email.me> <vfvo2o$2ln20$1@dont-email.me> <vg09p2$2kq69$1@dont-email.me> <vg0a9h$2op6r$1@dont-email.me> <fd8bf90393a5bcb10f7913da9081421637262590@i2pn2.org> <vg14nd$2t4b1$1@dont-email.me> <SGUUO.312650$kxD8.126005@fx11.iad> <vg16dl$2th77$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2024 11:40:19 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f3d815f22c211ba81933ff9202fa284b";
	logging-data="3379831"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18wyvZ0FglY+GfGDZeIIk1t"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mCMHHY6nlRw1un8Uxsk9qMTZ5Ew=
Bytes: 3958

On 2024-11-01 00:12:37 +0000, olcott said:

> On 10/31/2024 6:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 10/31/24 7:43 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/31/2024 6:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 10/31/24 12:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 10/31/2024 11:03 AM, Andy Walker wrote:
>>>>>> On 31/10/2024 11:01, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-30 11:17:45 +0000, Andy Walker said:
>>>>>>>> On 30/10/2024 03:50, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>>>>>>>> You may have noticed that the moron responded to your message in
>>>>>>>>> less than 10 minutes. Do you think he read the material before
>>>>>>>>> responding? A good troll would have waited a few hours before
>>>>>>>>> answering.
>>>>>>>>     I doubt whether Peter is either a moron or a troll.
>>>>>>> Does it really matter? If he falsely pretends to be a moron or a liar
>>>>>>> I may politely pretend to believe.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      It's not exactly polite to describe Peter in any of these ways!
>>>>>> Entirely personally, I see no reason to do so in any case.  He is quite
>>>>>> often impolite in response to being called a "stupid liar" or similar,
>>>>>> but that's understandable.  He is no worse than many a student in terms
>>>>>> of what he comprehends;  his fault lies in [apparently] believing that he
>>>>>> has a unique insight.
>>>>> 
>>>>> When what I say is viewed within the perspective of
>>>>> the philosophy of computation I do have new insight.
>>>>> 
>>>>> When what I say is viewed within the assumption that
>>>>> the current received view of the theory of computation
>>>>> is inherently infallible then what I say can only be
>>>>> viewed as incorrect.
>>>> 
>>>> So, are you willing to state that you are admitting that nothing you 
>>>> might come up with has any bearing on the original halting problem 
>>>> because you are working in a new framework?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I am admitting one of two things:
>>> (1) Everyone has misconstrued the original halting problem
>>> as not applying to the behavior actually specified by the
>>> actual input finite string.
>> 
>> Which is just a lie, so you are just admitting to not knowing what the 
>> facts are.
>> 
> 
> It can't possibly be a lie because I am not even asserting
> it as a truth only a possible truth of two possible truths.

A false assertion is a lie even if nobody asserts it.

-- 
Mikko