Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis --- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 20:41:10 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 74 Message-ID: References: <1bc1ab08ec47bf818ddff1d4f63b542ceadd6985@i2pn2.org> <086fc32f14bcc004466d3128b0fe585b27377399@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 02:41:11 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2dbd9b6f7d5f1796d3ffd574bf3f0b27"; logging-data="1903390"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ZFV5w0UdzhbrCRCyP9WpI" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:Alfuhyvu/xfnXbC+7SYQQ5F8pdU= X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241029-4, 10/29/2024), Outbound message Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus-Status: Clean In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4950 On 10/29/2024 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 10/29/24 10:41 AM, olcott wrote: >> On 10/29/2024 5:50 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 10/28/24 11:08 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 10/28/2024 9:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 10/28/24 9:09 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 10/28/2024 6:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is IMPOSSIBLE to emulate DDD per the x86 semantics without the >>>>>>> code for HHH, so it needs to be part of the input. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *You seemed to be a totally Jackass here* >>>>>> You are not that stupid >>>>>> You are not that ignorant >>>>>> and this is not your ADD >>>>>> >>>>>> _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] >>>>>> >>>>>> At machine address 0000217a HHH emulates itself emulating >>>>>> DDD without knowing that it is emulating itself. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then how did it convert the call HHH into an emulation of DDD again? >>>>> >>>> >>>> When HHH (unknowingly) emulates itself emulating DDD this >>>> emulated HHH is going to freaking emulate DDD. >>>> >>>> Did you think it was going to play poker? >>>> >>> >>> Which is what it would do, get stuck and fail to be a decider. It >>> might figure out that it is emulating an emulating decider, at which >>> point it knows that the decider might choose to abort its conditional >>> emulation to return, so it needs to emulate further. >>> >>> Only by recognizing itself, does it have grounds to say that if I >>> don't abort, it never will, and thus I am stuck, so I need to abort. >>> >> >> Counter-factual. This algorithm has no ability to its own code. >> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c // page 801 >> >> *That people fail to agree with this and also fail to* >> *correctly point out any error seems to indicate dishonestly* >> *or lack of technical competence* >> >> DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the x86 >> language cannot possibly reach its own "return" instruction >> whether or not any HHH ever aborts its emulation of DDD. >> > > No, it knows its own code because it rule for "No conditional branches" > excludes that code. > Are you really so stupid that you think this will help DDD reach its own return instruction? > And thus it is working with an invalid arguement. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer