Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1 --- STA
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:42:17 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <vslaka$ln0$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <vs9hh3$20g2j$6@dont-email.me> <vs9jie$23cav$4@dont-email.me> <vs9kb1$26cg5$2@dont-email.me> <vs9pni$27rl4$9@dont-email.me> <vs9r1b$28tqg$2@dont-email.me> <vs9t45$2f6n5$1@dont-email.me> <9f2ff3ab9b99a7bb6dfa0885f9757f810ce52e66@i2pn2.org> <vsaam4$2sfhq$1@dont-email.me> <vsbi7e$1hblk$1@dont-email.me> <vsc6qi$27lbo$2@dont-email.me> <8a3e7e93e6cad20b29d23405a0e6dbd497a492ac@i2pn2.org> <vscegq$2fv3s$2@dont-email.me> <26f33bb039fda7d28ae164cfc4d0f582d4698f31@i2pn2.org> <vsclsb$2n4jc$1@dont-email.me> <36a4c76730b23cf78ddde73c723116b5380973a1@i2pn2.org> <vsctnm$2ub5m$2@dont-email.me> <4285ea3219a2d5f2d6c52e84697fa4e3d3dc80cb@i2pn2.org> <vsd18m$379dn$1@dont-email.me> <vsdjff$3o5ff$1@dont-email.me> <vsem50$th5g$3@dont-email.me> <vsepbh$11dqg$1@dont-email.me> <vsf1b2$1a4fc$1@dont-email.me> <038ec0393503335f3bb71d4291c06e0133fc68f9@i2pn2.org> <vsjmks$26s7s$1@dont-email.me> <vsk0oe$2he20$1@dont-email.me> <vsknnf$378kj$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2025 08:42:18 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6df5713ce06bce9517b6ce5a28cb5963";
	logging-data="22240"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/kPLKVKs1Iur9qkbAOK3Hf"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:iieB2bFvO/DcngBrZc+1ifzRF/o=

On 2025-04-03 01:19:43 +0000, olcott said:

> On 4/2/2025 1:47 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 02.apr.2025 om 17:55 schreef olcott:
>>> On 4/2/2025 9:14 AM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Mon, 31 Mar 2025 16:26:58 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 3/31/2025 2:10 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 31.mrt.2025 om 20:16 schreef olcott:
>>>> 
>>>>>>> A simulating termination analyzer is always correct to abort the
>>>>>>> simulation and reject the input as non-halting when-so-ever this input
>>>>>>> would otherwise prevent itself from halting.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But the input is halting, as proven by direct execution.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Something other than the input is halting.
>>>>> HHH1(DDD) shows the same behavior as the direct execution.
>>>>>    HHH(DDD) shows the behavior of the actual input.
>>>> Why are you not passing DDD as input? Why do you not call what you're
>>>> doing HHH(HHH(DDD))? What is the difference in what is passed to HHH1?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> This seems to be above your level of technical competence.
>>> 
>>> _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]
>>> 
>>> Anyone understanding the above code where HHH
>>> emulates DDD according to the semantics of the
>>> x86 language knows that this DDD (not some
>>> other different DDD) cannot possibly reach its
>>> own final halt state.
> 
>> Yes it fails to reach the end of the simulation of a program that 
>> according to the x86 semantics has an end as proven by direct execution.
> 
> In other words you don't hardly know the x86
> language at all.

Although x86 is more complex than a Turing machine and might therefore
seem easier to use for obfuscation it is not really vague enough that
such obvuscation would succeed here.

-- 
Mikko