Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.spitfire.i.gajendra.net!not-for-mail
From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Very Stupid
 Mistake and Liars
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 11:18:44 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <vqueuk$idv$1@reader1.panix.com>
References: <vqntaq$1jut5$1@dont-email.me> <vqqrin$28lh2$4@dont-email.me> <vqs9ck$2lqb2$1@dont-email.me> <vqud4e$36e14$3@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 11:18:44 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="spitfire.i.gajendra.net:166.84.136.80";
	logging-data="18879"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Bytes: 2577
Lines: 39

In article <vqud4e$36e14$3@dont-email.me>,
Fred. Zwarts <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> wrote:
>Op 12.mrt.2025 om 16:31 schreef olcott:
>> [snip]
>> When N steps of DDD are correctly emulated by every element
>> of the set of C functions named HHH that do x86 emulation and
>> 
>> N is each element of the set of natural numbers
>> 
>> then no DDD of the set of HHH/DDD pairs ever reaches its
>> "return" instruction and terminates normally.
>
>In other words no HHH of the set of HHH/DDD pairs ever succeeds to 
>complete the simulation of a halting program. Failure to reach the end 
>of a halting program is not a great success. If all HHH in this set 
>fail, it would be better to change your mind and start working on 
>something more useful.

He seems to think that he's written a program that detects that
his thing hasn't 'reached its "return" instruction and
terminate[d] normally', given some number of steps, where that
number is ... the cardinality of the natural numbers.

I wonder if he knows that the set of natural numbers is
infintite, though I suspect he'd say something like, "but it's
countable!"  To which I'd surmise that he has no idea what that
means.

I plonked Olcott a few years ago, yet I see dozens of posts a
day a day of people replying to him.

I gather, based on reading the quoted text, that he is near the
end of a battle with cancer; that's very sad.  Perhaps he should
spend what time remains to him with friends and family, and less
arguing with strangers on USENET.  Maybe we could all help him
in this endeavor by not responding.  I, for one, intend to take
my own advice after this post.

 - Dan C.