Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Where are the calculations that go with a calculated risk?


devel / comp.theory / Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

SubjectAuthor
* Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredMr Flibble
+* Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredolcott
|`* Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredMr Flibble
| `* Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredolcott
|  +* Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredMr Flibble
|  |`- Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredolcott
|  `- Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredRichard Damon
`- Should any program that calls a halt decider be consideredRichard Damon

1
Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35314&group=comp.theory#35314

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx01.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc (Mr Flibble)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Message-ID: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
Organization: Jupiter Mining Corp
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 17
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eweka.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 16:31:19 UTC
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 17:31:25 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 1222
 by: Mr Flibble - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 16:31 UTC

Hi!

Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?

Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be considered
pathological?

Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a halt
decider be considered pathological even though his halt decider does
not return a value to its caller which is counter to the definition of
a valid halt decider.

/Flibble

Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<36adnTZiR-gKWlz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35316&group=comp.theory#35316

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic sci.math comp.software-eng
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: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 11:45:11 -0500
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 11:45:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.math,comp.software-eng
References: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <36adnTZiR-gKWlz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 37
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-5Efedia55+dGDi+WzS8y30QM2QmzVe7hKaVMmafIXIp30wjSLgGg1LmqgF8DCKWYI2Dns2/zSVHNqUY!4ya9yuac1UF68RSi29EZS3LShqq9+PkSiByOCJHdbB9odhkGkbccut6iAQOE97veGRzbGLKm75Cg
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: 2601
 by: olcott - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 16:45 UTC

On 7/3/2022 11:31 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
> pathological?
>
> Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
> discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
> decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be considered
> pathological?
>
> Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a halt
> decider be considered pathological even though his halt decider does
> not return a value to its caller which is counter to the definition of
> a valid halt decider.
>
> /Flibble
>

That you are trying to refute my paper without even looking at my paper
is both stupid and dishonest.

This general principle refutes conventional halting problem proofs
Every simulating halt decider that correctly simulates its input until
it correctly predicts that this simulated input would never reach its
final state, correctly rejects this input as non-halting.

*Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361701808_Halting_problem_proofs_refuted_on_the_basis_of_software_engineering

--
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: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<20220703175545.000061f6@reddwarf.jmc>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35317&group=comp.theory#35317

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic sci.math comp.software-eng
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!news.uzoreto.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx11.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc (Mr Flibble)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.math,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Message-ID: <20220703175545.000061f6@reddwarf.jmc>
References: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
<36adnTZiR-gKWlz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Organization: Jupiter Mining Corp
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 31
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eweka.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 16:55:38 UTC
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 17:55:45 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 1748
 by: Mr Flibble - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 16:55 UTC

On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 11:45:10 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:

> On 7/3/2022 11:31 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
> > pathological?
> >
> > Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
> > discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
> > decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be considered
> > pathological?
> >
> > Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a halt
> > decider be considered pathological even though his halt decider does
> > not return a value to its caller which is counter to the definition
> > of a valid halt decider.
> >
> > /Flibble
> >
>
> That you are trying to refute my paper without even looking at my
> paper is both stupid and dishonest.

I have no intention of reading your paper until you stop behaving
dishonestly in this forum and actually start addressing the points that
people are making.

/Flibble

Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<dsOdnU5KqqR9UVz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35318&group=comp.theory#35318

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic sci.math comp.software-eng
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: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 12:07:44 -0500
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:07:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.math,comp.software-eng
References: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
<36adnTZiR-gKWlz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220703175545.000061f6@reddwarf.jmc>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <20220703175545.000061f6@reddwarf.jmc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <dsOdnU5KqqR9UVz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 42
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-cFH82+m954Kph6c6bOhBpjNjwEjWfWiIcP+EDomiOj+7QAd0xqpAvmk3IqqVowl2DctIG+Q+FlMisXn!CZzAaPik8F5SJshyKXdAeeR4RMd6nJxH/OKyLdYO+MNPqPJwTtHFV7cNoHjKDW5Rd1BTvfCRsRhn
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: 2685
 by: olcott - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 17:07 UTC

On 7/3/2022 11:55 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 11:45:10 -0500
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/3/2022 11:31 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
>>> pathological?
>>>
>>> Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
>>> discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
>>> decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be considered
>>> pathological?
>>>
>>> Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a halt
>>> decider be considered pathological even though his halt decider does
>>> not return a value to its caller which is counter to the definition
>>> of a valid halt decider.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>
>> That you are trying to refute my paper without even looking at my
>> paper is both stupid and dishonest.
>
> I have no intention of reading your paper until you stop behaving
> dishonestly in this forum and actually start addressing the points that
> people are making.
>
> /Flibble
>

The point that you keep reinterating is that you do not fully comprehend
the concept of unreachble code.

--
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: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<20220703181236.00001fa3@reddwarf.jmc>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35319&group=comp.theory#35319

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic sci.math comp.software-eng
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.uzoreto.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx02.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc (Mr Flibble)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.math,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Message-ID: <20220703181236.00001fa3@reddwarf.jmc>
References: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
<36adnTZiR-gKWlz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220703175545.000061f6@reddwarf.jmc>
<dsOdnU5KqqR9UVz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Organization: Jupiter Mining Corp
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 44
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eweka.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 17:12:29 UTC
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 18:12:36 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 2222
 by: Mr Flibble - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 17:12 UTC

On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:07:43 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:

> On 7/3/2022 11:55 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 11:45:10 -0500
> > olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 7/3/2022 11:31 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>> Hi!
> >>>
> >>> Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
> >>> pathological?
> >>>
> >>> Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
> >>> discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
> >>> decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be
> >>> considered pathological?
> >>>
> >>> Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a
> >>> halt decider be considered pathological even though his halt
> >>> decider does not return a value to its caller which is counter to
> >>> the definition of a valid halt decider.
> >>>
> >>> /Flibble
> >>>
> >>
> >> That you are trying to refute my paper without even looking at my
> >> paper is both stupid and dishonest.
> >
> > I have no intention of reading your paper until you stop behaving
> > dishonestly in this forum and actually start addressing the points
> > that people are making.
> >
> > /Flibble
> >
>
> The point that you keep reinterating is that you do not fully
> comprehend the concept of unreachble code.

"stop behaving dishonestly in this forum"

/Flibble

Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<tPidnZkO6ai9Ulz_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35320&group=comp.theory#35320

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic sci.math comp.software-eng
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: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 12:17:20 -0500
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:17:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.math,comp.software-eng
References: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
<36adnTZiR-gKWlz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220703175545.000061f6@reddwarf.jmc>
<dsOdnU5KqqR9UVz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220703181236.00001fa3@reddwarf.jmc>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <20220703181236.00001fa3@reddwarf.jmc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <tPidnZkO6ai9Ulz_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 57
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-XNnItYKkE3xoBMmPr8cK+08ulh3G4eGZ2avJRvNRj+KKJEnLk7uMvIKJcTlrap63pl02iBafcTOD6lv!x2FDfqhDF6ioLh9nAHsn8izAWFupe5qkSStkNu6BxXta4EXf1uMUvzaaA1J1hLXbB0rQ05NAOsS8
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: 3274
 by: olcott - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 17:17 UTC

On 7/3/2022 12:12 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:07:43 -0500
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/3/2022 11:55 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 11:45:10 -0500
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/3/2022 11:31 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>
>>>>> Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
>>>>> pathological?
>>>>>
>>>>> Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
>>>>> discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
>>>>> decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be
>>>>> considered pathological?
>>>>>
>>>>> Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a
>>>>> halt decider be considered pathological even though his halt
>>>>> decider does not return a value to its caller which is counter to
>>>>> the definition of a valid halt decider.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That you are trying to refute my paper without even looking at my
>>>> paper is both stupid and dishonest.
>>>
>>> I have no intention of reading your paper until you stop behaving
>>> dishonestly in this forum and actually start addressing the points
>>> that people are making.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>
>> The point that you keep reinterating is that you do not fully
>> comprehend the concept of unreachble code.
>
> "stop behaving dishonestly in this forum"
>
> /Flibble

When you have your halt decider fork another process so that a funcction
called in infinite recursion can return you its caller you cheat.

Whenever a function called in infinite recursion returns to its caller
it it wrong.

--
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: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<cDkwK.16694$kY1.2630@fx06.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35323&group=comp.theory#35323

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx06.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/91.11.0
Subject: Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <cDkwK.16694$kY1.2630@fx06.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: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 13:47:51 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 2486
 by: Richard Damon - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 17:47 UTC

On 7/3/22 12:31 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
> pathological?
>
> Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
> discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
> decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be considered
> pathological?
>
> Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a halt
> decider be considered pathological even though his halt decider does
> not return a value to its caller which is counter to the definition of
> a valid halt decider.
>
> /Flibble
>

There is nothing "Patholgical" about one Turing Machine/Program using
another.

In fact, the whole purpose of designing a Halt Decider is to let it be
embedded in another program to help it decide on things.

if anything, the "Pathology" isn't in the program itself, but in doing
BOTH the act contrary and process a representation of yourself, but
there is nothing "incorrect" about that "pathology".

Note, one impression I get from his descriptions of H and his x86UTM
system is that the code to H doesn't actually meet the requirements of
the code that his system is designed to process (H calls stuff that
"user" programs aren't allowed to do) and as such H can't actually
emulate the code of H, so doesn't actually even attempt to correctly
emulate calls to H but handle calls to H specially.

Thus, to Peter's H, ANY function that calls H is a pathological
condition as it is the case that H can't actually do what it claims to
do, that is correctly emulate its input.

Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered pathological?

<hEkwK.16695$kY1.2991@fx06.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=35324&group=comp.theory#35324

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx06.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/91.11.0
Subject: Re: Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
pathological?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <20220703173125.0000646f@reddwarf.jmc>
<36adnTZiR-gKWlz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220703175545.000061f6@reddwarf.jmc>
<dsOdnU5KqqR9UVz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <dsOdnU5KqqR9UVz_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <hEkwK.16695$kY1.2991@fx06.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: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 13:49:01 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 2402
 by: Richard Damon - Sun, 3 Jul 2022 17:49 UTC

On 7/3/22 1:07 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/3/2022 11:55 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 11:45:10 -0500
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/3/2022 11:31 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> Should any program that calls a halt decider be considered
>>>> pathological?
>>>>
>>>> Specifically is a program that calls a halt decider but
>>>> discards the result (rather than behaving differently to what the
>>>> decider decides thereby being an "impossible program") be considered
>>>> pathological?
>>>>
>>>> Olcott's thesis is predicated on all programs that reference a halt
>>>> decider be considered pathological even though his halt decider does
>>>> not return a value to its caller which is counter to the definition
>>>> of a valid halt decider.
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>> That you are trying to refute my paper without even looking at my
>>> paper is both stupid and dishonest.
>>
>> I have no intention of reading your paper until you stop behaving
>> dishonestly in this forum and actually start addressing the points that
>> people are making.
>>
>> /Flibble
>>
>
> The point that you keep reinterating is that you do not fully comprehend
> the concept of unreachble code.
>

Except that the code that you say is unreachable isn't actually
unreachable if H does give an answer to that input.

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor