| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<vh96c2$3rlks$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---SUCCINCT Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 22:17:06 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 94 Message-ID: <vh96c2$3rlks$1@dont-email.me> References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vh4ti4$2qj8g$1@dont-email.me> <4524b9dcb46740847649bcb907a87acbac1d00da@i2pn2.org> <vh5e3t$2tvu0$1@dont-email.me> <9b99b4dfe14296c74eeebd76b13369648e9e6059@i2pn2.org> <vh5fsd$2tvu0$2@dont-email.me> <a39b254c0aa0260206e0c21419993ea84007f765@i2pn2.org> <vh5hmo$2v2hi$1@dont-email.me> <8ee04a00a23875dac3d741882bffbdcb81dd7acb@i2pn2.org> <vh5ils$2v8v9$1@dont-email.me> <9807cd8f9a43d7c9e9f13c6f113276cfd5f20b97@i2pn2.org> <vh5m5h$191h$1@news.muc.de> <vh5mh7$301h0$1@dont-email.me> <9e7d357b9e3959bb8394d9bf45e6161a7c9145aa@i2pn2.org> <vh6c68$33nek$2@dont-email.me> <0a0894cfd14377a9fcf89638c7705420507f571e@i2pn2.org> <vh8pas$3lqmu$1@dont-email.me> <463966aff896041f1ea77478554251554a6ef456@i2pn2.org> <vh93nj$3r8ig$1@dont-email.me> <9c41d73f0cda8f10434729bdbc0963a95582bd5d@i2pn2.org> <vh957l$3rg98$1@dont-email.me> <ae415d1a0f07aa76d9a0dd2ef1078ffeb9b03b32@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2024 05:17:06 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="16729fe49be52c96931729700fb02df3"; logging-data="4052636"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19tCv0tTJNnGIN3PNGY+sqh" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:ypo/BnGtsSkdng9/BZfZ26hSqww= X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241115-4, 11/15/2024), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean In-Reply-To: <ae415d1a0f07aa76d9a0dd2ef1078ffeb9b03b32@i2pn2.org> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 5431 On 11/15/2024 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 11/15/24 10:57 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 11/15/2024 9:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 11/15/24 10:32 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 11/15/2024 9:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 11/15/24 7:34 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 11/14/2024 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 11/14/24 9:38 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 11/14/2024 2:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 11/14/24 3:28 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2024 2:22 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> joes <noreply@example.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> What are weasel words? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Words whose precise meaning is difficult/impossible to pin >>>>>>>>>>> down, and >>>>>>>>>>> deliberately so. Politicians use these all the time. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _DDD() >>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD >>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) >>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04 >>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d pop ebp >>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3 ret >>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH cannot possibly reach its "ret" >>>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But the emulation by HHH is NOT the DEFINITION of the behavior >>>>>>>>> that HHH is suppoded to be reporting on. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Right and likewise ZFC is "supposed to include" sets that >>>>>>>> are members of themselves. Thus according to your reasoning >>>>>>>> ZFC is wrong because is directly disobeys the dogma of >>>>>>>> naive set theory. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Where did I say that? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You seem to be halucinationg. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That behavior that HHH is supposed to be reporting on is the >>>>>>>>> behavior of the actual direct exectution of the program >>>>>>>>> described by the input, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> IN OTHER WORDS YOU ARE SAYING THAT HHH SHOULD STUPIDLY IGNORE >>>>>>>> THE FACT THAT DDD DOES SPECIFY THAT HHH MUST EMULATE ITSELF >>>>>>>> EMULATING DDD >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DDD doesn't "say" anything, it is a program that defines how it >>>>>>> will run. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The semantics of the x86 language specifies that HHH must >>>>>> emulate itself emulating DDD. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> There is no "emulate" instruction. >>>>> >>>>> The semantics of the x86 language specifies that HHH must do as it >>>>> is programmed, and that the correct emulation of it will do EXACTLY >>>>> the same thing. >>>>> >>>> >>>> When HHH <is> an x86 emulator >>>> (are you too stupid to remember this?) Then >>>> The semantics of the x86 language specifies that HHH must >>>> emulate itself emulating DDD. >>>> >>> >>> But it *ISN'T* one if it stops its emulation before it reaches the >>> final end. >>> >> Sure it is you are just a liar. >> > > You got a source to back up your claim, Full source-code backs up my claim you schmuck. https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer