Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

:-) your own self. -- Larry Wall in <199709261754.KAA23761@wall.org>


devel / comp.theory / Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

SubjectAuthor
* Category errorMr Flibble
+* Category errorolcott
|`* Category errorRichard Damon
| `* Category errorolcott
|  `* Category errorRichard Damon
|   `* Category errorolcott
|    `* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|     `* Category errorolcott
|      `* Category errorRichard Damon
|       +* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|       |`* Category errorolcott
|       | `* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|       |  +- Category errorRichard Damon
|       |  `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   +* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]André G. Isaak
|       |   |`* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   | +* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]André G. Isaak
|       |   | |`* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   | | `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]André G. Isaak
|       |   | |  `- Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   | `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   |  `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   |   `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   |    `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   |     `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   |      `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   |       `- Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |    `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |     `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |      `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |       `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |        `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |         `- Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       `* Category errorolcott
|        +* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|        |`* Category errorolcott
|        | `* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|        |  `* Category errorolcott
|        |   +* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|        |   |`- Category errorolcott
|        |   `* Category errorRichard Damon
|        |    `* Category errorolcott
|        |     `* Category errorRichard Damon
|        |      `* Category errorolcott
|        |       `- Category errorRichard Damon
|        `- Category errorRichard Damon
+* Category errorwij
|`* Category errorMr Flibble
| `- Category errorolcott
`* Category errorMikko
 `* Category errorolcott
  +* Category errorRichard Damon
  |`* Category errorolcott
  | `- Category errorRichard Damon
  `* Category errorBen
   +* Category errorolcott
   |+- Category errorRichard Damon
   |`- Category errorBen
   `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
    +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
    `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben
     `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
      +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Malcolm McLean
      | `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      |  +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
      |  `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Malcolm McLean
      |   `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      |    `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
      `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben
       `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
        +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
        `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben
         `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
          +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
          +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)olcott
          |+- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Richard Damon
          |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Ben
          | `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)olcott
          |  +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)olcott
          |  +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Richard Damon
          |  `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Ben
          |   `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)olcott
          |    +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)Richard Damon
          |    `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)Ben
          |     +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)olcott
          |     |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)Ben
          |     | `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Ben
          |     |  |+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  ||+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Richard Damon
          |     |  |||+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  ||||`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Richard Damon
          |     |  |||| `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  ||||  `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Richard Damon
          |     |  |||`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Malcolm McLean
          |     |  ||| `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  |||  `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Richard Damon
          |     |  ||`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Ben
          |     |  |+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  |+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Richard Damon
          |     `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)olcott
          +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Python
          `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben

Pages:123456789101112
Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)

<t68c0n$10ie$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32687&group=comp.theory#32687

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!rocksolid2!i2pn.org!aioe.org!CC3uK9WYEoa7s1kzH7komw.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: news.dea...@darjeeling.plus.com (Mike Terry)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 16:27:18 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t68c0n$10ie$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87pmk96oho.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <nOudnWReB9ozfBv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0p6n4s.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <XbadnfDtZoa1bxv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87zgjd55i7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <KfGdneynl8aSahv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9k6gx2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2c6dnWpNOpoTlBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilq05usu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <pYydnUB1xoYCOBr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="33358"; posting-host="CC3uK9WYEoa7s1kzH7komw.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.7.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Mike Terry - Fri, 20 May 2022 15:27 UTC

On 20/05/2022 15:28, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2022 6:04 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/19/2022 10:07 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/19/2022 8:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:52 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) == false is wrong about the halting of P(P) and the trace does
>>>>>>>>>>>> not back-up what you say your H is doing.  There's nothing left here.
>>>>>>>>>>>> But there's always the TM emulator...  How's that coming along?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There are about two lines of code that are out-of-place. I have been
>>>>>>>>>>> ill and had other issues that I had to deal with.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So maybe another month or so and you can start to write a parity
>>>>>>>>>> checking TM?  Those out-of-place lines can be a bugger to find ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I planned on having this done by now. The problem seems to be that the
>>>>>>>>> specification of the state transition function is not precise enough.
>>>>>>>> Unlikely.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A transition rule of a Turing machine has the following form
>>>>>>>>> δ(p, X) = (q, Y, L).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> pXYqL
>>>>>>>>> This means that from state p, on reading the symbol X on the tape,
>>>>>>>>>       the machine moves to state q,
>>>>>>>>>       replaces X with Y and
>>>>>>>>>       moves the tape head to the left.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>       void move_left();    // Tape_Head--; Left.push_back(0); as needed
>>>>>>>>>       void move_right();   // Tape_Head++; Left.push_back(0); as needed
>>>>>>>>>       void Write(tape_element Y){ this->operator[](Tape_Head) = Y; };
>>>>>>>>>       tape_element Read()       { return this->operator[](Tape_Head); };
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For example, the quintuple 'SCcsm' is executed by the machine:
>>>>>>>>> If it is in state 'S' and is reading the symbol 'C' on the tape then
>>>>>>>>> (a) make a transition to state 's'.
>>>>>>>>> (b) overwrite the symbol 'C' on the tape with the symbol 'c'.
>>>>>>>>> (c) move the tape reading head one symbol to the left or right
>>>>>>>>>          according to whether 'm' is 'l' or 'r'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When I implement it exactly as specified the behavior of my TM on the
>>>>>>>>> Paren.tm is not the same as the original TM.exe.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's called a bug.  I am amazed that your reaction to the fact that your
>>>>>>>> program does not do what it should is that the specification is wrong.
>>>>>>>> It's just a common or garden bug.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do all of the steps in the exact order that they are specified and
>>>>>>> it does not work. The problem is that the spec is vague on which input
>>>>>>> symbol is required for the state transition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see nothing vague about it.  δ(p, X) = (q, Y, L) means that in state
>>>>>> p, with X at the tape head, replace the X with Y, move the head left
>>>>>> and enter state q.
>>>>>
>>>>> That does not actually work.
>>>> It's the definition of the state transition function.  It is what it
>>>> is.  Here is the TM you talked about (paren.tm) accepting a string:
>>>> $ ./tm -f paren.tm "(())"
>>>>          0 ______________________________[0|(]())___________________________
>>>>          1 _____________________________([0|(]))____________________________
>>>>          2 ____________________________(([0|)])_____________________________
>>>>          3 _____________________________([1|(]A)____________________________
>>>>          4 ____________________________(A[0|A])_____________________________
>>>>          5 ___________________________(AA[0|)]______________________________
>>>>          6 ____________________________(A[1|A]A_____________________________
>>>>          7 _____________________________([1|A]AA____________________________
>>>>          8 ______________________________[1|(]AAA___________________________
>>>>          9 _____________________________A[0|A]AA____________________________
>>>>         10 ____________________________AA[0|A]A_____________________________
>>>>         11 ___________________________AAA[0|A]______________________________
>>>>         12 __________________________AAAA[0|_]______________________________
>>>>         13 ___________________________AAA[2|A]______________________________
>>>>         14 ____________________________AA[2|A]A_____________________________
>>>>         15 _____________________________A[2|A]AA____________________________
>>>>         16 ______________________________[2|A]AAA___________________________
>>>>         17 ______________________________[2|_]AAAA__________________________
>>>>         18 ______________________________[Y|A]AAA___________________________
>>>> accept after 18 steps.
>>>
>>> I can't [quite] tell what that says.
>>
>> If you want to know, just ask.
>>
>>> The original TM.exe provides a good trace.
>>>
>>> tm> read tm paren
>>
>> I don't need to see any more traces.  My interpreter has a trace format
>> command-line option so I can generate this sort of trace if you find it
>> easier to follow.  I prefer the compact form myself (obviously, since I
>> made it the default).
>>
>>>> What states does your interpreter show the TM going through?
>>
>> This was the point of giving a trace.  How does your interpretation of
>> what you see as the imprecise specification differ from this?  If can't
>> interpret the specification, you'll get stuck right away.
>>
>
> My TM gets the first 4 state transitions correctly and then diverges from TM.exe

That looks like it goes wrong at the first point where the tape is actually CHANGED by writing a
different character to what's already on the tape? If so, what could go wrong? Either You write
the wrong character, or you write the correct character but in the wrong place!

The only thing I can imagine going wrong is doing things in the wrong order - maybe you update the
head position /before/ updating the tape, and then you update the /new/ tape location rather than
the /original/ tape location. Just step in a debugger and see that the right update to state+tape
is happening! (There's only two things being updated!!)

Mike.

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)

<87ee0o43st.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32688&group=comp.theory#32688

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 16:33:22 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <87ee0o43st.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87pmk96oho.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<nOudnWReB9ozfBv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0p6n4s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XbadnfDtZoa1bxv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87zgjd55i7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<KfGdneynl8aSahv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9k6gx2.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2c6dnWpNOpoTlBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<8SKhK.460$3Gzd.56@fx96.iad> <87v8u0466n.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VdOhK.2212$Rvub.1322@fx35.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cdab4b3beb056ab549fca8770562cf4a";
logging-data="29588"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/s+3pWiC71hl0mELI4WDmtwWhRkwi40es="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:18jQI9+Qs7Y3l6jx2PrMXEkMONI=
sha1:V8vegWjBAOgoltOVx9JFuodfp8U=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.d9ae7cee9d6e9a97cb75.20220520163322BST.87ee0o43st.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 20 May 2022 15:33 UTC

Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> writes:

> On 5/20/22 10:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>> Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> writes:

>>>> On 5/19/2022 10:07 PM, Ben wrote:
>>
>>>>> $ ./tm -f paren.tm "(())"
>>>>>         0 ______________________________[0|(]())___________________________
>>> Not even knowing his program I can read it.
>>>
>>> In the middle is the current state in brackets []
>>>
>>> to the left of that is the tape to the left of the head.
>>>
>>> to the right of that is the tape under the head and to the right.
>>
>> The current symbol is in the []s as well: [0|(].
>
> yes, I missed that [ | and ] all look similar on the screen without
> good context.
>
> Maybe adding a space outside the [ ] would make it more readable,
> though maybe reading them enough makes it not needed.

The program has a user-defined trace format, so I've been experimenting.
You might prefer to have the tape head set off with spaces and the
current state underneath:

0 ______________________________ ( (()))_________________________
0 write (, move R, go 0
1 _____________________________( ( ()))__________________________
0 write (, move R, go 0
2 ____________________________(( ( )))___________________________
0 write (, move R, go 0
3 ___________________________((( ) ))____________________________
0 write A, move L, go 1
4 ____________________________(( ( A))___________________________
1 write A, move R, go 0
5 ___________________________((A A ))____________________________
0 write A, move R, go 0

Other options that look good use colours and/or attributes like
underlining and reverse video.

--
Ben.

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)

<wuCdnV7-Fov1Khr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32689&group=comp.theory#32689

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 10:44:40 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 10:44:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87pmk96oho.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <nOudnWReB9ozfBv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0p6n4s.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <XbadnfDtZoa1bxv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87zgjd55i7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <KfGdneynl8aSahv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9k6gx2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2c6dnWpNOpoTlBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilq05usu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <pYydnUB1xoYCOBr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<t68c0n$10ie$1@gioia.aioe.org>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t68c0n$10ie$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <wuCdnV7-Fov1Khr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 177
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8APkqt+Yj/Ed4OYuSF1ZcYqAaM/65RO4DnYHcuDYmRykZoWhiqJ7c0q+MHzztY25OsgOT3MXG3awcKY!y38iaQSco15gWtRXxNbogb12NyWZ1+HDpPQSzUOw6U6B7xmClg0UXwQcrZZfWmSS/LZouEqyEVU=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 9556
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 15:44 UTC

On 5/20/2022 10:27 AM, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 20/05/2022 15:28, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/20/2022 6:04 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/19/2022 10:07 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 8:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:52 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) == false is wrong about the halting of P(P) and the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trace does
>>>>>>>>>>>>> not back-up what you say your H is doing.  There's nothing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> left here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But there's always the TM emulator...  How's that coming
>>>>>>>>>>>>> along?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are about two lines of code that are out-of-place. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> have been
>>>>>>>>>>>> ill and had other issues that I had to deal with.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So maybe another month or so and you can start to write a parity
>>>>>>>>>>> checking TM?  Those out-of-place lines can be a bugger to
>>>>>>>>>>> find ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I planned on having this done by now. The problem seems to be
>>>>>>>>>> that the
>>>>>>>>>> specification of the state transition function is not precise
>>>>>>>>>> enough.
>>>>>>>>> Unlikely.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A transition rule of a Turing machine has the following form
>>>>>>>>>> δ(p, X) = (q, Y, L).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> pXYqL
>>>>>>>>>> This means that from state p, on reading the symbol X on the
>>>>>>>>>> tape,
>>>>>>>>>>       the machine moves to state q,
>>>>>>>>>>       replaces X with Y and
>>>>>>>>>>       moves the tape head to the left.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>       void move_left();    // Tape_Head--; Left.push_back(0);
>>>>>>>>>> as needed
>>>>>>>>>>       void move_right();   // Tape_Head++; Left.push_back(0);
>>>>>>>>>> as needed
>>>>>>>>>>       void Write(tape_element Y){ this->operator[](Tape_Head)
>>>>>>>>>> = Y; };
>>>>>>>>>>       tape_element Read()       { return
>>>>>>>>>> this->operator[](Tape_Head); };
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For example, the quintuple 'SCcsm' is executed by the machine:
>>>>>>>>>> If it is in state 'S' and is reading the symbol 'C' on the
>>>>>>>>>> tape then
>>>>>>>>>> (a) make a transition to state 's'.
>>>>>>>>>> (b) overwrite the symbol 'C' on the tape with the symbol 'c'.
>>>>>>>>>> (c) move the tape reading head one symbol to the left or right
>>>>>>>>>>          according to whether 'm' is 'l' or 'r'.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When I implement it exactly as specified the behavior of my TM
>>>>>>>>>> on the
>>>>>>>>>> Paren.tm is not the same as the original TM.exe.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's called a bug.  I am amazed that your reaction to the fact
>>>>>>>>> that your
>>>>>>>>> program does not do what it should is that the specification is
>>>>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>>>>> It's just a common or garden bug.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I do all of the steps in the exact order that they are specified
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> it does not work. The problem is that the spec is vague on which
>>>>>>>> input
>>>>>>>> symbol is required for the state transition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see nothing vague about it.  δ(p, X) = (q, Y, L) means that in
>>>>>>> state
>>>>>>> p, with X at the tape head, replace the X with Y, move the head left
>>>>>>> and enter state q.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That does not actually work.
>>>>> It's the definition of the state transition function.  It is what it
>>>>> is.  Here is the TM you talked about (paren.tm) accepting a string:
>>>>> $ ./tm -f paren.tm "(())"
>>>>>          0
>>>>> ______________________________[0|(]())___________________________
>>>>>          1
>>>>> _____________________________([0|(]))____________________________
>>>>>          2
>>>>> ____________________________(([0|)])_____________________________
>>>>>          3
>>>>> _____________________________([1|(]A)____________________________
>>>>>          4
>>>>> ____________________________(A[0|A])_____________________________
>>>>>          5
>>>>> ___________________________(AA[0|)]______________________________
>>>>>          6
>>>>> ____________________________(A[1|A]A_____________________________
>>>>>          7
>>>>> _____________________________([1|A]AA____________________________
>>>>>          8
>>>>> ______________________________[1|(]AAA___________________________
>>>>>          9
>>>>> _____________________________A[0|A]AA____________________________
>>>>>         10
>>>>> ____________________________AA[0|A]A_____________________________
>>>>>         11
>>>>> ___________________________AAA[0|A]______________________________
>>>>>         12
>>>>> __________________________AAAA[0|_]______________________________
>>>>>         13
>>>>> ___________________________AAA[2|A]______________________________
>>>>>         14
>>>>> ____________________________AA[2|A]A_____________________________
>>>>>         15
>>>>> _____________________________A[2|A]AA____________________________
>>>>>         16
>>>>> ______________________________[2|A]AAA___________________________
>>>>>         17
>>>>> ______________________________[2|_]AAAA__________________________
>>>>>         18
>>>>> ______________________________[Y|A]AAA___________________________
>>>>> accept after 18 steps.
>>>>
>>>> I can't [quite] tell what that says.
>>>
>>> If you want to know, just ask.
>>>
>>>> The original TM.exe provides a good trace.
>>>>
>>>> tm> read tm paren
>>>
>>> I don't need to see any more traces.  My interpreter has a trace format
>>> command-line option so I can generate this sort of trace if you find it
>>> easier to follow.  I prefer the compact form myself (obviously, since I
>>> made it the default).
>>>
>>>>> What states does your interpreter show the TM going through?
>>>
>>> This was the point of giving a trace.  How does your interpretation of
>>> what you see as the imprecise specification differ from this?  If can't
>>> interpret the specification, you'll get stuck right away.
>>>
>>
>> My TM gets the first 4 state transitions correctly and then diverges
>> from TM.exe
>
> That looks like it goes wrong at the first point where the tape is
> actually CHANGED by writing a different character to what's already on
> the tape?  If so, what could go wrong?  Either You write the wrong
> character, or you write the correct character but in the wrong place!
>
> The only thing I can imagine going wrong is doing things in the wrong
> order - maybe you update the head position /before/ updating the tape,
> and then you update the /new/ tape location rather than the /original/
> tape location.  Just step in a debugger and see that the right update to
> state+tape is happening!  (There's only two things being updated!!)
>
> Mike.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)

<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32690&group=comp.theory#32690

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 10:49:21 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 10:49:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 77
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-z4DNGCVwNItc0ENgaFQfwj2hFWvY2RGF5ankx7HaPuVLblVTJhYo0h8XUUFOg2ETcf0VMIpvgJQw7nC!/lii9IKeVCL5gfSspbOPG2h9Ep5WwmjdJKJ3jAgfEPlRCWvBZZpeJR5eP3RHo1cR8KxEmrGn04g=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4621
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 15:49 UTC

On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>
>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>
>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>> more details [would not help].
>>> (Your correction added)
>>>
>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>
>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>
> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.

That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
you are very stupid.

> And
> having admitted to editing the traces, no one is going to believe you.
>
> But I urge you, most forcefully, to find someone to review your claims
> who you have enough respect for to listen to what they have to say.
>
>> These smart non-liars would know that they don't need the 237 pages of
>> execution trace or the source-code of H to definitively determine that
>> H(P,P)==0 is correct.
>
> It would be dumb to accept edited traces that don't show the nested
> emulation you claim is occurring. Maybe you can find a smart sucker out
> there? We all know they exist.
>

If you simply hypothesize that nested emulation is occurring the traces
are consistent with this.

> But first you'd have explain why they should care about what H is
> actually deciding

H is deciding the behavior of its correctly simulated input.

> since it isn't the halting of the call specified by
> the problem definition. Apparently you accept (but dare not actually
> state) that not algorithm an do what H is supposed to do. It'll be hard
> to get people enthusiastic about a function that just gets halting of
> the conventional constriction wrong.
>
>> Number of Instructions Executed(15892) = 237 pages
>
> Post it all (if indeed it even exists) or better yet, stop keeping H a
> secret.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)

<xLmdnTjhLtuFIBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32692&group=comp.theory#32692

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:08:56 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:08:55 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <xLmdnTjhLtuFIBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 70
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-lewFz8mTscSoiYap0XLAjtFNy3fNKU6hI1LzhjQrLTFGZCr0KcBBchygl68degvMbVNvDVWlyW/bs/p!3Q2y3xuv10o0204bgDpAZaIxnYOhr2r4qkYcbTmB6kFBheXWdZFk/O9/Oy6saa9ihA7sLXszeKs=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4606
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:08 UTC

On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>
>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>
>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>> more details [would not help].
>>> (Your correction added)
>>>
>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>
>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>
> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing. And
> having admitted to editing the traces, no one is going to believe you.
>

THIS IS A FACT THAT CAN BE VERIFIED BY PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT GOD DAMNED
LIARS THAT HAVE THE REQUIRED TECHNICAL SKILL:

The trace provided by H(P,P) of the nested simulation of its input
IS THE TRACE OF A CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION OF ITS INPUT.

> But I urge you, most forcefully, to find someone to review your claims
> who you have enough respect for to listen to what they have to say.
>
>> These smart non-liars would know that they don't need the 237 pages of
>> execution trace or the source-code of H to definitively determine that
>> H(P,P)==0 is correct.
>
> It would be dumb to accept edited traces that don't show the nested
> emulation you claim is occurring. Maybe you can find a smart sucker out
> there? We all know they exist.
>
> But first you'd have explain why they should care about what H is
> actually deciding since it isn't the halting of the call specified by
> the problem definition. Apparently you accept (but dare not actually
> state) that not algorithm an do what H is supposed to do. It'll be hard
> to get people enthusiastic about a function that just gets halting of
> the conventional constriction wrong.
>
>> Number of Instructions Executed(15892) = 237 pages
>
> Post it all (if indeed it even exists) or better yet, stop keeping H a
> secret.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)

<878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32694&group=comp.theory#32694

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 17:26:51 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cdab4b3beb056ab549fca8770562cf4a";
logging-data="8874"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX194QhgzEXLHhdD8p3SRs1FzRXSpGugF224="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:g1LKH+6hSKIpNeuqqBQ4urVFgvM=
sha1:5cQlvUYBheItzzdGB/1VW/9lXFA=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.81202602d37cc83b3885.20220520172651BST.878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:26 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>
>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>
>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>
>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>
>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>
> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
> you are very stupid.

I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
like your trace. And if you've edited it so as to make it look there is
no nested emulation, then you are very foolish.

Good luck finding someone to take this seriously.

Or just post H so it's not quite so obvious that you are hiding
something.

>> Apparently you accept (but dare not actually
>> state) that not algorithm an do what H is supposed to do. It'll be hard
>> to get people enthusiastic about a function that just gets halting of
>> the conventional construction wrong.

No comment on this, of course, because that -- the actual halting
problem -- was what you've spent the last 18 years on, not on traces of
H(X,Y) failing to decide the halting of X(Y).

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32695&group=comp.theory#32695

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:31:07 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:31:06 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 88
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Y1g9ZoJx7KSXAUBBAJJL4wFsphhdMU4A6rC6qCHPlD80GBepaoC8m81nCPxRRst7zddyLfyhPnSo3Gm!VsnsF2C1eWm2HfEV/mEYa+tKsC/m10AJqbM4QT8OkrVY31zJWT28J5gAxEV+jytssqnCp1wHwiI=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5620
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:31 UTC

On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>
>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>
>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>
>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>
>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>> you are very stupid.
>
> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
> like your trace.

This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)

Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
....[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
....[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
....[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
....[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
....[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
....[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
....[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
....[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).

> And if you've edited it so as to make it look there is
> no nested emulation, then you are very foolish.
>
> Good luck finding someone to take this seriously.
>
> Or just post H so it's not quite so obvious that you are hiding
> something.
>
>>> Apparently you accept (but dare not actually
>>> state) that not algorithm an do what H is supposed to do. It'll be hard
>>> to get people enthusiastic about a function that just gets halting of
>>> the conventional construction wrong.
>
> No comment on this, of course, because that -- the actual halting
> problem -- was what you've spent the last 18 years on, not on traces of
> H(X,Y) failing to decide the halting of X(Y).
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)

<8735h4412o.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32696&group=comp.theory#32696

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 17:32:15 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <8735h4412o.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<xLmdnTjhLtuFIBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cdab4b3beb056ab549fca8770562cf4a";
logging-data="8874"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+G2B50O92gvkoFqsxvmgzDttdLQOwTqho="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:y8rf14QGCNwhul6aPSuU2lso31M=
sha1:loM4r/NOWjh4QHr6JT3WNIlAosg=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.a661f2723ec63b99f2d7.20220520173215BST.8735h4412o.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:32 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>
>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>
>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>
>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>
>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing. And
>> having admitted to editing the traces, no one is going to believe you.
>
> THIS IS A FACT THAT CAN BE VERIFIED BY PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT GOD DAMNED
> LIARS THAT HAVE THE REQUIRED TECHNICAL SKILL:
>
> The trace provided by H(P,P) of the nested simulation of its input
> IS THE TRACE OF A CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION OF ITS INPUT.

The trace shows no sign of any nested simulation -- though since you'd
edited the trace (apparently) you might have removed such signs.

But for people when still care about the halting problem, the trace says
nothing about H(P,P) giving the wrong answer.

Why not post the whole thing, or better yet, post H? Well, we know why.
You are trying to hide what's really going on. You could dispense with
all possible doubts by just posting H, but you won't because the game
(and I mean that literally) would be up if you did.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)

<Y7qdnZi-NM1iXhr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32697&group=comp.theory#32697

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:38:23 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:38:22 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<xLmdnTjhLtuFIBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <8735h4412o.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <8735h4412o.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Y7qdnZi-NM1iXhr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 67
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-EUXu0h9vrH/vWZ/lt7zik6Js0L8OSOKwRiYyZKjoYqrkbx525ggxp/5LHh2O2uJ+CNoombQbEMqq+F7!EwbryP6wjw7wxXaccBJOUDvI85NZccd2bl2C5Ou1hnCD52U1CVcz1EqpnRvOmKHWqUQJ/d88I6s=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4571
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:38 UTC

On 5/20/2022 11:32 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>
>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>
>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>
>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing. And
>>> having admitted to editing the traces, no one is going to believe you.
>>
>> THIS IS A FACT THAT CAN BE VERIFIED BY PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT GOD DAMNED
>> LIARS THAT HAVE THE REQUIRED TECHNICAL SKILL:
>>
>> The trace provided by H(P,P) of the nested simulation of its input
>> IS THE TRACE OF A CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION OF ITS INPUT.
>
> The trace shows no sign of any nested simulation -- though since you'd
> edited the trace (apparently) you might have removed such signs.

IT IS THE TRACE OF A CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION OF ITS INPUT.

WHEN WE CREATE A TRACE OF WHAT THE CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION
OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD LOOK LIKE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE THAT
HAS BEEN PROVIDED.

>
> But for people when still care about the halting problem, the trace says
> nothing about H(P,P) giving the wrong answer.
>
> Why not post the whole thing, or better yet, post H? Well, we know why.
> You are trying to hide what's really going on. You could dispense with
> all possible doubts by just posting H, but you won't because the game
> (and I mean that literally) would be up if you did.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32699&group=comp.theory#32699

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 17:41:42 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cdab4b3beb056ab549fca8770562cf4a";
logging-data="8874"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/LrPxlC7CXkfFOUppYH2LYZdVOVPEhwqw="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XHR2Pd7fpKRwTApn1WdYMPo4A/g=
sha1:N4hLeG6sS2BGe8wtVs0G2uQRODs=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.d4bd17397dbd9cb35366.20220520174142BST.87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:41 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>
>>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>
>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>> you are very stupid.
>> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>> like your trace.
>
> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)

So you say. But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
of function calls. No emulation code appears at all. You may have
removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
to do.

> You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
> execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).

Post H and I'll gladly explain. We know that H is not a halt decider,
but we don't know exactly what silly thing it really is deciding because
you post only edited execution traces.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32700&group=comp.theory#32700

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:51:31 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:51:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 70
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-cp82r06d3ZadryXv90saiujcVEhgwYRQWKM+EoCOjUgSAlvpEb7BTd+Oqh2e7YOa1L9/ug0XiB+tdPT!Ck/pOqHi3D3lNPDsDNfWGbphN5Z5NgSpqswMwt7E7M7NVkERDoz5tzmb+SlNYpbCAxSJwFbuK5A=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4724
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:51 UTC

On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>
>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>>> you are very stupid.
>>> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>> like your trace.
>>
>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>
> So you say. But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
> of function calls. No emulation code appears at all. You may have
> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
> to do.
>

NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
CORRECT.

>> You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
>> execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).
>
> Post H and I'll gladly explain. We know that H is not a halt decider,
> but we don't know exactly what silly thing it really is deciding because
> you post only edited execution traces.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<iIPhK.544$qt97.181@fx97.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32701&group=comp.theory#32701

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx97.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc> <t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 113
Message-ID: <iIPhK.544$qt97.181@fx97.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 12:53:34 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 6478
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 20 May 2022 16:53 UTC

On 5/20/22 12:31 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS
>>>>>>>>> THAT
>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>
>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>
>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>> you are very stupid.
>>
>> I really don't care.  The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>> like your trace.
>
> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)

So you say, but it doesn't actually match with what you claim.

A trace of the simulation of an input should show the trace of the
simulation of THAT input, and not switch to a different simulation even
if of the same input at a differnt level.

You apparently don't understand what a simulation trace actually is.

If H IS a simulator, like you claim, then the simulation of the call to
H from P should show the steps that H does to simulate the input that
call gave it, not "switching" to a different level of simulation.
>
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
> You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
> execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).

No, YOU HAVE BEEN exposed as the LIAR.

I know of NO machine where a call 000011a2 is followed by an instruction
at 00001352, so the trace is NOT correct.

You may claim that the stuff isn't relevent, but incorrect traces are
incorrect traces.

The second half of that trace can ONLY be correct (but needing a not of
a break in trace) if H actually just calls P(P). If it does that, then
it couldn't have aborted its simulation, and thus you are shown to be a
LIAR.

>
>
>> And if you've edited it so as to make it look there is
>> no nested emulation, then you are very foolish.
>>
>> Good luck finding someone to take this seriously.
>>
>> Or just post H so it's not quite so obvious that you are hiding
>> something.
>>
>>>> Apparently you accept (but dare not actually
>>>> state) that not algorithm an do what H is supposed to do.  It'll be
>>>> hard
>>>> to get people enthusiastic about a function that just gets halting of
>>>> the conventional construction wrong.
>>
>> No comment on this, of course, because that -- the actual halting
>> problem -- was what you've spent the last 18 years on, not on traces of
>> H(X,Y) failing to decide the halting of X(Y).
>>
>
>

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)

<ePPhK.8$KWh.6@fx02.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32702&group=comp.theory#32702

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx02.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<xLmdnTjhLtuFIBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <8735h4412o.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Y7qdnZi-NM1iXhr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <Y7qdnZi-NM1iXhr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 93
Message-ID: <ePPhK.8$KWh.6@fx02.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 13:00:57 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5248
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 20 May 2022 17:00 UTC

On 5/20/22 12:38 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2022 11:32 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS
>>>>>>>>> THAT
>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>
>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.  And
>>>> having admitted to editing the traces, no one is going to believe you.
>>>
>>> THIS IS A FACT THAT CAN BE VERIFIED BY PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT GOD DAMNED
>>> LIARS THAT HAVE THE REQUIRED TECHNICAL SKILL:
>>>
>>> The trace provided by H(P,P) of the nested simulation of its input
>>> IS THE TRACE OF A CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION OF ITS INPUT.
>>
>> The trace shows no sign of any nested simulation -- though since you'd
>> edited the trace (apparently) you might have removed such signs.
>
> IT IS THE TRACE OF A CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION OF ITS INPUT.

No, because there is no signs of the simulator simulating its input, so
there is no "nested simulation"

>
> WHEN WE CREATE A TRACE OF WHAT THE CORRECTLY SIMULATED NESTED SIMULATION
> OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD LOOK LIKE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE THAT
> HAS BEEN PROVIDED.

Nope.

Maybe try holding your breath until you are blue in the face. That might
get people to understand you better.

Just repeating your incorrect statements doesn't change the fact that
they are wrong, just shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

Unless you are trying to invent some new type of nested simulation
computation structure with a different type of trace, your data is just
a lie.

Simulation traces show the trace of a give execution path, so don't jump
from one level to another. When you show a simulation of P being decided
by H, the execution trace of the H that this P calls doesn't "replace"
the trace of the simulation of that H.

This is ESPECIALLY true if H does conditional simulation because it is
also halt detecting.

You lack of understanding this just shows your incompetence in Computer
Science.

>
>>
>> But for people when still care about the halting problem, the trace says
>> nothing about H(P,P) giving the wrong answer.
>>
>> Why not post the whole thing, or better yet, post H?  Well, we know why.
>> You are trying to hide what's really going on.  You could dispense with
>> all possible doubts by just posting H, but you won't because the game
>> (and I mean that literally) would be up if you did.
>>
>
>

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)

<sUPhK.437$lut9.310@fx99.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32703&group=comp.theory#32703

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx99.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (TM design)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87pmk96oho.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<nOudnWReB9ozfBv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0p6n4s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XbadnfDtZoa1bxv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87zgjd55i7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<KfGdneynl8aSahv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9k6gx2.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2c6dnWpNOpoTlBr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <8SKhK.460$3Gzd.56@fx96.iad>
<87v8u0466n.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VdOhK.2212$Rvub.1322@fx35.iad>
<87ee0o43st.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <87ee0o43st.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <sUPhK.437$lut9.310@fx99.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 13:06:32 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4151
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 20 May 2022 17:06 UTC

On 5/20/22 11:33 AM, Ben wrote:
> Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/22 10:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> writes:
>
>>>>> On 5/19/2022 10:07 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> $ ./tm -f paren.tm "(())"
>>>>>>         0 ______________________________[0|(]())___________________________
>>>> Not even knowing his program I can read it.
>>>>
>>>> In the middle is the current state in brackets []
>>>>
>>>> to the left of that is the tape to the left of the head.
>>>>
>>>> to the right of that is the tape under the head and to the right.
>>>
>>> The current symbol is in the []s as well: [0|(].
>>
>> yes, I missed that [ | and ] all look similar on the screen without
>> good context.
>>
>> Maybe adding a space outside the [ ] would make it more readable,
>> though maybe reading them enough makes it not needed.
>
> The program has a user-defined trace format, so I've been experimenting.
> You might prefer to have the tape head set off with spaces and the
> current state underneath:
>
> 0 ______________________________ ( (()))_________________________
> 0 write (, move R, go 0
> 1 _____________________________( ( ()))__________________________
> 0 write (, move R, go 0
> 2 ____________________________(( ( )))___________________________
> 0 write (, move R, go 0
> 3 ___________________________((( ) ))____________________________
> 0 write A, move L, go 1
> 4 ____________________________(( ( A))___________________________
> 1 write A, move R, go 0
> 5 ___________________________((A A ))____________________________
> 0 write A, move R, go 0
>
> Other options that look good use colours and/or attributes like
> underlining and reverse video.
>

The being inline isn't the issue, not being distinct enough from the
rest of the tape was.

Colors would work well on a screen, but don't make good text files.

adding a space around the [s|t] might make it more visable so line 4
would be

4 ____________________________(( [1|(] A))___________________________

Particualarly with the tape being a sea of "vertical" symbols, making
the head more distinct is helpful.

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32704&group=comp.theory#32704

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!rocksolid2!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx99.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 83
Message-ID: <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 13:10:01 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4932
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 20 May 2022 17:10 UTC

On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
>>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
>>>>>>>>>> un-edited
>>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you post
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>>>> you are very stupid.
>>>> I really don't care.  The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>>> like your trace.
>>>
>>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>
>> So you say.  But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
>> of function calls.  No emulation code appears at all.  You may have
>> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
>> to do.
>>
>
> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
> SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
> THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
> CORRECT.

Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just run it.

Unless you don't actually have an H?

Also, as been pointed out, that isn't even a correct "Reverse
Engineering", as it doesn't match what P actually does.

Maybe it is the trace that some hypothetical H needs to make to show
that it is right, but of course that H needs to both directly call its
input to execute uncondtionally but still keep control to abort. A
contradiction in terms.

>
>>> You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
>>> execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).
>>
>> Post H and I'll gladly explain.  We know that H is not a halt decider,
>> but we don't know exactly what silly thing it really is deciding because
>> you post only edited execution traces.
>>
>
>

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<NoudnbaDNqdzURr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32705&group=comp.theory#32705

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 12:16:30 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 12:16:29 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <NoudnbaDNqdzURr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 76
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-R2yPWgM9pC4y4XXeMVyVg42fe0XL/xpTl96UnrnBimJFzYDhDwqSQk82DqZ9iTH8L6kfqHcSU3+wdxC!NurNuX2kDehWan4bTgWsthXZvZSV8TNehkJ4EVc/US1w9E7ed995bUWvc8dB6JSd3DeEL4QzxDY=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5018
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 17:16 UTC

On 5/20/2022 12:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
>>>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
>>>>>>>>>>> un-edited
>>>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you
>>>>>>>>> post the
>>>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to
>>>>>>>>> convince
>>>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>>>>> you are very stupid.
>>>>> I really don't care.  The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>>>> like your trace.
>>>>
>>>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>>
>>> So you say.  But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
>>> of function calls.  No emulation code appears at all.  You may have
>>> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
>>> to do.
>>>
>>
>> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
>> SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE
>> TRACE THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE
>> PROVIDED IS CORRECT.
>
> Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just run it.
>

When you reverse-engineer what the trace should be then you can confirm
that the trace provided is correct without having the source-code for H
or seeing the 237 pages of the execution trace of H.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<b7QhK.440$lut9.172@fx99.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32707&group=comp.theory#32707

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx99.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
<NoudnbaDNqdzURr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <NoudnbaDNqdzURr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 89
Message-ID: <b7QhK.440$lut9.172@fx99.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 13:22:15 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5454
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 20 May 2022 17:22 UTC

On 5/20/22 1:16 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2022 12:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
>>>>>>>>>>>> un-edited
>>>>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you
>>>>>>>>>> post the
>>>>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to
>>>>>>>>>> convince
>>>>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> you are very stupid.
>>>>>> I really don't care.  The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>>>>> like your trace.
>>>>>
>>>>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>>>
>>>> So you say.  But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
>>>> of function calls.  No emulation code appears at all.  You may have
>>>> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
>>>> to do.
>>>>
>>>
>>> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
>>> SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE
>>> TRACE THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE
>>> PROVIDED IS CORRECT.
>>
>> Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just run it.
>>
>
> When you reverse-engineer what the trace should be then you can confirm
> that the trace provided is correct without having the source-code for H
> or seeing the 237 pages of the execution trace of H.
>
>

Nope, since a proper reverse-engineering of what the trace SHOULD look
like should have your first 7 lines, then a trace of what happens in H,
and the the trace of what that P does when H returns to it.

THAT is what the trace should look like.

There is NEVER another direct execution of the instructions of P, unless
H actually DOES call its input, but then it can't 'abort' its simulation.

Either your H's aren't the same (and thus you are caught in the lie that
you are following the requriement that H^ uses the H that it is supposed
to confound), that H isn't actually a computation, and depends on some
extra input to affect its behavior (which also catches you in a lie) or
the trace just isn't correct.

Which way is it.

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<DNidnc-ULZmYUhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32708&group=comp.theory#32708

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 12:25:25 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 12:25:24 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
<NoudnbaDNqdzURr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b7QhK.440$lut9.172@fx99.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <b7QhK.440$lut9.172@fx99.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <DNidnc-ULZmYUhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 149
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Ff8lQi0LACpdX8rdlygs6Yhz40dWQ2kAWMfXxoRI2NqozWhDewH3h9eFX/AgyH0ZZro+X18DIKMsbFw!ntrG6EiKoQZjc+FJXpMuuD5K6UhTaEkOXopPLW2tkl7t3D2tnR6KLz+++e7D+70oWvnWt7jTjr8=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 7512
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 17:25 UTC

On 5/20/2022 12:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/20/22 1:16 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/20/2022 12:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> un-edited
>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you
>>>>>>>>>>> post the
>>>>>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to
>>>>>>>>>>> convince
>>>>>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> you are very stupid.
>>>>>>> I really don't care.  The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>>>>>> like your trace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>>>>
>>>>> So you say.  But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
>>>>> of function calls.  No emulation code appears at all.  You may have
>>>>> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd
>>>>> thing
>>>>> to do.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
>>>> SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE
>>>> TRACE THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE
>>>> PROVIDED IS CORRECT.
>>>
>>> Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just run
>>> it.
>>>
>>
>> When you reverse-engineer what the trace should be then you can
>> confirm that the trace provided is correct without having the
>> source-code for H or seeing the 237 pages of the execution trace of H.
>>
>>
>
> Nope, since a proper reverse-engineering of what the trace SHOULD look
> like should have your first 7 lines, then a trace of what happens in H,
> and the the trace of what that P does when H returns to it.
>

NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
SIMULATION OF

THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE

IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE
TRACE THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE
PROVIDED IS CORRECT.

> THAT is what the trace should look like.
>
> There is NEVER another direct execution of the instructions of P, unless
> H actually DOES call its input, but then it can't 'abort' its simulation.
>
> Either your H's aren't the same (and thus you are caught in the lie that
> you are following the requriement that H^ uses the H that it is supposed
> to confound), that H isn't actually a computation, and depends on some
> extra input to affect its behavior (which also catches you in a lie) or
> the trace just isn't correct.
>
> Which way is it.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<gsQhK.4284$5fVf.1494@fx09.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32709&group=comp.theory#32709

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx09.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad> <NoudnbaDNqdzURr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b7QhK.440$lut9.172@fx99.iad> <DNidnc-ULZmYUhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <DNidnc-ULZmYUhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 162
Message-ID: <gsQhK.4284$5fVf.1494@fx09.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 13:44:43 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 7710
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 20 May 2022 17:44 UTC

On 5/20/22 1:25 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2022 12:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/20/22 1:16 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/20/2022 12:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> un-edited
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> providing 237-fold
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you
>>>>>>>>>>>> post the
>>>>>>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to
>>>>>>>>>>>> convince
>>>>>>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not
>>>>>>>>> believe that
>>>>>>>>> you are very stupid.
>>>>>>>> I really don't care.  The trace of a nested emulation would not
>>>>>>>> look
>>>>>>>> like your trace.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you say.  But there are no signs of anything but an edited
>>>>>> sequence
>>>>>> of function calls.  No emulation code appears at all.  You may have
>>>>>> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd
>>>>>> thing
>>>>>> to do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
>>>>> SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE
>>>>> TRACE THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE
>>>>> PROVIDED IS CORRECT.
>>>>
>>>> Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just
>>>> run it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> When you reverse-engineer what the trace should be then you can
>>> confirm that the trace provided is correct without having the
>>> source-code for H or seeing the 237 pages of the execution trace of H.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Nope, since a proper reverse-engineering of what the trace SHOULD look
>> like should have your first 7 lines, then a trace of what happens in
>> H, and the the trace of what that P does when H returns to it.
>>
>
> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
> SIMULATION OF
>
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
> THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE
>
> IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE
> TRACE THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE
> PROVIDED IS CORRECT.

Nope.

I guess you need to take reading lessons.

Maybe you a nap time or your binky.

I told you what the REAL correct trace of the simulation of the input to
H(P,P) would be, at least if H is supposed to be a Halt Decider.

I guess the real answer is H isn't actually supposed to be a Halt
Decider, because those can't exist (which proves the Theorem you are
claiming to be trying to refute)

>
>
>> THAT is what the trace should look like.
>>
>> There is NEVER another direct execution of the instructions of P,
>> unless H actually DOES call its input, but then it can't 'abort' its
>> simulation.
>>
>> Either your H's aren't the same (and thus you are caught in the lie
>> that you are following the requriement that H^ uses the H that it is
>> supposed to confound), that H isn't actually a computation, and
>> depends on some extra input to affect its behavior (which also catches
>> you in a lie) or the trace just isn't correct.
>>
>> Which way is it.
>
>

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<abad3b41-68f2-425f-827c-ec252599faaan@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32710&group=comp.theory#32710

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:ac7:b0:462:1edc:a1cf with SMTP id g7-20020a0562140ac700b004621edca1cfmr575914qvi.82.1653070240926;
Fri, 20 May 2022 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:d049:0:b0:64d:1a13:67a1 with SMTP id
h70-20020a25d049000000b0064d1a1367a1mr11457469ybg.114.1653070240642; Fri, 20
May 2022 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23a8:400a:5601:e0a8:c078:ffb7:7804;
posting-account=Dz2zqgkAAADlK5MFu78bw3ab-BRFV4Qn
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23a8:400a:5601:e0a8:c078:ffb7:7804
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc> <t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <abad3b41-68f2-425f-827c-ec252599faaan@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
From: malcolm....@gmail.com (Malcolm McLean)
Injection-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 18:10:40 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 5623
 by: Malcolm McLean - Fri, 20 May 2022 18:10 UTC

On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 18:10:06 UTC+1, richar...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
> > On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
> >> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
> >>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
> >>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
> >>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
> >>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
> >>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
> >>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
> >>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
> >>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
> >>>>>>>>>> un-edited
> >>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
> >>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
> >>>>>>>>> 237-fold
> >>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
> >>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
> >>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
> >>>>> you are very stupid.
> >>>> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
> >>>> like your trace.
> >>>
> >>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
> >>
> >> So you say. But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
> >> of function calls. No emulation code appears at all. You may have
> >> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
> >> to do.
> >>
> >
> > NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
> > SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
> > THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
> > CORRECT.
> Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just run it.
>
> Unless you don't actually have an H?
>
> Also, as been pointed out, that isn't even a correct "Reverse
> Engineering", as it doesn't match what P actually does.
>
> Maybe it is the trace that some hypothetical H needs to make to show
> that it is right, but of course that H needs to both directly call its
> input to execute uncondtionally but still keep control to abort. A
> contradiction in terms.
>
PO has provided an explanation. The first seven instructions are output
by the emulator directly. It then switches off tracing when it detects that it is
emulating itself. The second seven instructions are the output of the emulated
program.
I'd like to see the source of H to confirm that this is actually happening.
The traces as presented are confusing because it's not made clear that
the first set are direct, the second set indirect.

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<vs2dncVe5qkKRhr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32711&group=comp.theory#32711

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 13:19:03 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 13:19:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
<abad3b41-68f2-425f-827c-ec252599faaan@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <abad3b41-68f2-425f-827c-ec252599faaan@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <vs2dncVe5qkKRhr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 101
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-DUp/bVjDa3wcyIZkIj4HgZoNU4mdT/4f7ZxPdEORpZdVW2gLRo8mgYhoEFSYZaKN6GVON2PBudOeFRG!B7kqenTpZft0NgbniBTCgmPiRKuOfipJhYOWq6u5gTGGak17wENwXAiD5P6F2blZBuL7POWNf8c=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 6526
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 18:19 UTC

On 5/20/2022 1:10 PM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 18:10:06 UTC+1, richar...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
>>>>>>>>>>>> un-edited
>>>>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>>>>>> you are very stupid.
>>>>>> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>>>>> like your trace.
>>>>>
>>>>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>>>
>>>> So you say. But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
>>>> of function calls. No emulation code appears at all. You may have
>>>> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
>>>> to do.
>>>>
>>>
>>> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
>>> SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
>>> THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
>>> CORRECT.
>> Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just run it.
>>
>> Unless you don't actually have an H?
>>
>> Also, as been pointed out, that isn't even a correct "Reverse
>> Engineering", as it doesn't match what P actually does.
>>
>> Maybe it is the trace that some hypothetical H needs to make to show
>> that it is right, but of course that H needs to both directly call its
>> input to execute uncondtionally but still keep control to abort. A
>> contradiction in terms.
>>
> PO has provided an explanation. The first seven instructions are output
> by the emulator directly. It then switches off tracing when it detects that it is
> emulating itself. The second seven instructions are the output of the emulated
> program.

No this is not true. The emulator is hard-coded to only output the
execution trace of user-code and to not output the execution trace of
any operating system code.

> I'd like to see the source of H to confirm that this is actually happening.
> The traces as presented are confusing because it's not made clear that
> the first set are direct, the second set indirect.

Honest people with sufficient technical competence would be able to
reverse-engineer exactly what the execution trace of the input to H(P,P)
would look like thus conclusively proving that H does provide a correct
execution trace of the x86 emulation of its input and the execution
trace of one nested emulation of this input.

You are the only one here that is honest. Everyone else has their only
priority of proving me wrong even if I am correct.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<R5RhK.545$qt97.439@fx97.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32712&group=comp.theory#32712

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx97.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<jPednedJMZKJWhr_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <LXPhK.438$lut9.290@fx99.iad>
<abad3b41-68f2-425f-827c-ec252599faaan@googlegroups.com>
<vs2dncVe5qkKRhr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <vs2dncVe5qkKRhr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 127
Message-ID: <R5RhK.545$qt97.439@fx97.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 14:29:05 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 7134
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 20 May 2022 18:29 UTC

On 5/20/22 2:19 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2022 1:10 PM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>> On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 18:10:06 UTC+1, richar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On 5/20/22 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> un-edited
>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing
>>>>>>>>>>>> 237-fold
>>>>>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Your traces are edited.  No one will believe them until you post
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to
>>>>>>>>>>> convince
>>>>>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't lie.  Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> you are very stupid.
>>>>>>> I really don't care.  The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>>>>>> like your trace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>>>>
>>>>> So you say.  But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
>>>>> of function calls.  No emulation code appears at all.  You may have
>>>>> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd
>>>>> thing
>>>>> to do.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
>>>> SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
>>>> THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
>>>> CORRECT.
>>> Why do we need to "Reverse Engineer" the trace, when you can just run
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Unless you don't actually have an H?
>>>
>>> Also, as been pointed out, that isn't even a correct "Reverse
>>> Engineering", as it doesn't match what P actually does.
>>>
>>> Maybe it is the trace that some hypothetical H needs to make to show
>>> that it is right, but of course that H needs to both directly call its
>>> input to execute uncondtionally but still keep control to abort. A
>>> contradiction in terms.
>>>
>> PO has provided an explanation. The first seven instructions are output
>> by the emulator directly. It then switches off tracing when it detects
>> that it is
>> emulating itself. The second seven instructions are the output of the
>> emulated
>> program.
>
> No this is not true. The emulator is hard-coded to only output the
> execution trace of user-code and to not output the execution trace of
> any operating system code.

But the copy of H that P calls IS "User Code".

That is a fundamental error. EVERYTHING that P does is part of its
execution, and needs to be considered.

After all, Turing Machine, which this is supposed to be the equivalent
of, don't have anything BUT "User Code"

If you are defining that H isn't able to be used by user code, then you
need to give P its own copy that is, as well as everything that is calls.

You just seem to be trying to define your system as not Turing Complete.

>
>> I'd like to see the source of H to confirm that this is actually
>> happening.
>> The traces as presented are confusing because it's not made clear that
>> the first set are direct, the second set indirect.
>
> Honest people with sufficient technical competence would be able to
> reverse-engineer exactly what the execution trace of the input to H(P,P)
> would look like thus conclusively proving that H does provide a correct
> execution trace of the x86 emulation of its input and the execution
> trace of one nested emulation of this input.

Nope, the COMPETENT people have described what the correct trace would
be, which differs from what you say.

Only the incompetent agree with you (that would be just you)

>
> You are the only one here that is honest. Everyone else has their only
> priority of proving me wrong even if I am correct.
>

Since even Malcolm points out that your H isn't actually a Hlt Decider,
by calling him honest, you are essential argeeing that you are WRONG
about refuting the Halting THeorem.

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<xemdnW4D8OOYZhr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32715&group=comp.theory#32715

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 15:33:09 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 15:33:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <xemdnW4D8OOYZhr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 70
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-ebhkrc8/nENM+NraXFgBEoDD9U1AadbJVBKPmWIrSUgC25vm5lczf1ffWPxr7Kj733hsLYX19M22q0C!0zwsDNy9QOvOqp4Bbn3aoTBcEiMXT5O5HWcnC7Q/3Cr0n8CBEY9CJjlpiAVHXC7ZrnOjf8IDrtQ=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4751
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 20:33 UTC

On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>
>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>>> you are very stupid.
>>> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>> like your trace.
>>
>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>
> So you say. But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
> of function calls. No emulation code appears at all. You may have
> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
> to do.

NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
CORRECT.

>> You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
>> execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).
>
> Post H and I'll gladly explain. We know that H is not a halt decider,
> but we don't know exactly what silly thing it really is deciding because
> you post only edited execution traces.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<xemdnWkD8OO5Zhr_nZ2dnUU7_8z8fwAA@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32716&group=comp.theory#32716

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 15:33:39 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 15:33:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <xemdnWkD8OO5Zhr_nZ2dnUU7_8z8fwAA@giganews.com>
Lines: 69
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-H0PBkhCI8FQCkGAt0CIl5m6kG1TFs54vrzcNqfw4zbX9/Ahls7aL6MWurO+qJgmNacLbUg+yjxOpo6Z!ZFGyDwGS1llnEPV6w/OlVZEWracxkMVoTOcMqLRZeZiIe1bwtpVnmGbz2NLVMHKk3URdIbFOXE8=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4749
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 20:33 UTC

On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>
>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>>> you are very stupid.
>>> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>> like your trace.
>>
>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>
> So you say. But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
> of function calls. No emulation code appears at all. You may have
> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
> to do.

NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
CORRECT.

>> You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
>> execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).
>
> Post H and I'll gladly explain. We know that H is not a halt decider,
> but we don't know exactly what silly thing it really is deciding because
> you post only edited execution traces.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]

<xemdnWgD8OOoZhr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32717&group=comp.theory#32717

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 15:33:57 -0500
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 15:33:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[
Ben is a Liar ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkvt6n3s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yeCdnWc-Ja14txr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d6g5tuo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<A5adnZZH0fB8Nxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0ag44sa.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q5WdnfJskMwcJRr_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rqw41bo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<YuSdnW-aUL3WXxr_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87wneg2m2h.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <xemdnWgD8OOoZhr_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 70
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-dr1WhpTS75Fiv16M1Nt4xjyCKr2lR8eyyojCld2PT+uDLE9SWcVoj9WFP0RqJnwHrbEYPatT0JedztP!EMdtTL9FggS7YlWMcxrm/bGfs2xgLmo/0voXTGhy0yEmrBJiRuT2s6mDZIOOFeY20uYqq46AKNQ=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4751
 by: olcott - Fri, 20 May 2022 20:33 UTC

On 5/20/2022 11:41 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/20/2022 11:26 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2022 10:12 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/20/2022 6:25 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2022 7:53 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT
>>>>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) CORRESPONDS TO
>>>>>>>>>> THE BEHAVIOR SPECIFIED BY THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF P
>>>>>>>>>> WHERE H(P,P) CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>> THAT CALLS H(P,P) THAT CORRECTLY EMULATES ITS INPUT
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rather than shouting, you could either publish an honest, un-edited
>>>>>>>>> execution trace,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you can't understand that a single page already proves that
>>>>>>>> H(p,P)==0 is correct it is certainly the case that providing 237-fold
>>>>>>>> more details [would not help].
>>>>>>> (Your correction added)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your traces are edited. No one will believe them until you post the
>>>>>>> real trace, and even then you will have some work to do to convince
>>>>>>> people you are being honest about the output.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can simply upgrade to smarter people that don't lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't lie. Your trace does not show what you claim H is doing.
>>>>
>>>> That is either a lie or you are very stupid and I do not believe that
>>>> you are very stupid.
>>> I really don't care. The trace of a nested emulation would not look
>>> like your trace.
>>
>> This <is> the trace of the nested emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>
> So you say. But there are no signs of anything but an edited sequence
> of function calls. No emulation code appears at all. You may have
> removed the evidence that you are right, but that would an absurd thing
> to do.

NONE-THE-LESS WHEN WE REVERSE ENGINEER WHAT THE CORRECT NESTED
SIMULATION OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) WOULD BE IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE TRACE
THAT IS PROVIDED THUS CONCLUSIVELY PROVING THAT THE TRACE PROVIDED IS
CORRECT.

>> You will be exposed as a liar when you try to show any error in the
>> execution trace of the nested simulation of the input to H(P,P).
>
> Post H and I'll gladly explain. We know that H is not a halt decider,
> but we don't know exactly what silly thing it really is deciding because
> you post only edited execution traces.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Pages:123456789101112
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor