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 ---x86 code is a liar?
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2024 11:16:20 +0200
Organization: -
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <vh9nt4$3ukcd$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vghb16$2ge1v$1@dont-email.me> <e51f21daadd358ef13801c918106c2fdc65a9f6b@i2pn2.org> <vghe3p$2gr3p$1@dont-email.me> <4cb98b3918d6745f53bb19582b59e786d4af5022@i2pn2.org> <vghgar$2h30o$1@dont-email.me> <e40629600e317dba47dd3d066d83899fa7b8a7ab@i2pn2.org> <vgiq1d$2nkqv$1@dont-email.me> <e84328012ce8d1e75b9b569f15f74fde315a0548@i2pn2.org> <vgjd2f$2qdc5$1@dont-email.me> <4654d9db2fa0906d7ab7a1c6c09139ab0b0110cd@i2pn2.org> <vgl7vl$37h38$4@dont-email.me> <vgnph1$3qcpl$1@dont-email.me> <vgns0o$3qq7s$1@dont-email.me> <vgsnod$upmp$1@dont-email.me> <vgt61q$11e5a$3@dont-email.me> <4eebe767dc236a7770566fc1593aae14a38cb085@i2pn2.org> <vgtbpd$12ji4$1@dont-email.me> <49bbc7f6ba667da66bc56c69db049774c066d084@i2pn2.org> <vgvmtb$1kbe2$1@dont-email.me> <vh20o5$25r1d$1@dont-email.me> <vh3bn2$2e37l$6@dont-email.me> <vh4env$2o2ht$1@dont-email.me> <vh62i2$32617$4@dont-email.me> <vh73mm$3bep5$1@dont-email.me> <vh8ma6$3l333$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2024 10:16:20 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="adc74453b133be1c8bcb5c026250e294";
	logging-data="4149645"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/by7FdQtcX73PFSw3lE+NA"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:R6wbOCOfG+Rt+1JNpFS2dgyL3f4=
Bytes: 3922

On 2024-11-15 23:43:02 +0000, olcott said:

> On 11/15/2024 3:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-11-14 23:53:38 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 11/14/2024 3:09 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-11-13 23:11:30 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 11/13/2024 4:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-11-12 13:58:03 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 11/12/2024 1:12 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 11 Nov 2024 10:35:57 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/11/2024 10:25 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 11 Nov 2024 08:58:02 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/11/2024 4:54 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-09 14:36:07 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/9/2024 7:53 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The actual computation itself does involve HHH emulating itself
>>>>>>>>>>> emulating DDD. To simply pretend that this does not occur seems
>>>>>>>>>>> dishonest.
>>>>>>>>>> Which is what you are doing: you pretend that DDD calls some other HHH
>>>>>>>>>> that doesn’t abort.
>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH does not reach its "return" instruction final halt
>>>>>>>>> state whether HHH aborts its emulation or not.
>>>>>>>> When DDD calls a simulator that aborts, that simulator returns to DDD,
>>>>>>>> which then halts.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It is not the same DDD as the DDD under test.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If the DDD under the test is not the same as DDD then the test
>>>>>> is performed incorrectly and the test result is not valid.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The DDD under test IS THE INPUT DDD
>>>>> IT IS STUPIDLY WRONG-HEADED TO THINK OTHERWISE.
>>>> 
>>>> I agree that there is only one DDD but above you said otherwise.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> That is a ridiculously stupid thing to say because we
>>> already know that DDD emulated by HHH emulates itself
>>> emulating DDD and DDD emulated by HHH1 *DOES NOT DO THAT*
>> 
>> You are free to laugh if you think the truth is stupid.
> 
> This is my life's only legacy that I really want to complete
> before I die.

What does that "This" mean?

-- 
Mikko