Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof

From	Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups	comp.theory
Subject	Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof
Date	2024-08-02 14:25 -0400
Organization	i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID	<a287d1fc2c1fc90d4381e46eae05287b96e801b9@i2pn2.org> (permalink)
References	(24 earlier) <v8fuj5$24rl1$10@dont-email.me> <v8g1j7$24u77$6@dont-email.me> <v8g2jl$26d7d$1@dont-email.me> <v8ibf5$2p7ho$1@dont-email.me> <s3CdnbweXt8ohDD7nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

Show all headers | View raw

On 8/2/24 1:39 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 02/08/2024 11:12, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-08-01 13:29:24 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 8/1/2024 8:12 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 01.aug.2024 om 14:20 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 8/1/2024 3:10 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 31.jul.2024 om 23:23 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 7/31/2024 3:01 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 31.jul.2024 om 17:14 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 7/31/2024 3:44 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 31.jul.2024 om 06:09 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>   machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>>>>>>>>>>>   address   address   data      code       language
>>>>>>>>>>>   ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
>>>>>>>>>>> [00002192][00103820][00000000] 55         push ebp
>>>>>>>>>>> [00002193][00103820][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>>>>>> [00002195][0010381c][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; 
>>>>>>>>>>> push DDD
>>>>>>>>>>> [0000219a][00103818][0000219f] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 ; 
>>>>>>>>>>> call HHH(DDD)
>>>>>>>>>>> New slave_stack at:1038c4
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We don't show any of HHH and show the execution trace of
>>>>>>>>>>> of just DDD assuming that HHH is an x86 emulator.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This assumption is incorrect if it means that HHH is an 
>>>>>>>>>> unconditional simulator that does not abort.
>>>>>>>>> This algorithm is used by all the simulating termination 
>>>>>>>>> analyzers:
>>>>>>>>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 
>>>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>>>      *If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its 
>>>>>>>>> input D*
>>>>>>>>>      *until H correctly determines that its simulated D would 
>>>>>>>>> never*
>>>>>>>>>      *stop running unless aborted* then
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>>>>>>>>>      specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>>>>>>>>> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 
>>>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, Sipser only agreed to a correct simulation, not with an 
>>>>>>>> incorrect simulation that violates the semantics of the x86 
>>>>>>>> language by skipping the last few instructions of a halting 
>>>>>>>> program.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>    HHH(DD);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
>>>>>>> second line. I switched to DDD correctly emulated by HHH
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But it has been proven that no such HHH exists that simulates 
>>>>>> itself correctly. So, talking about a correct simulation by HHH is 
>>>>>> vacuous word salad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> because only C experts understood the above example and we
>>>>>>> never had any of those here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many C experts that looked at it, but you only got 
>>>>>> critic, because you keep hiding important properties of HHH, which 
>>>>>> made the conclusion impossible.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following is all that is needed for 100% complete proof
>>>>> that HHH did emulate DDD correctly according to the semantics
>>>>> of the x86 language and did emulate itself emulating DDD
>>>>> according to these same semantics.
>>>>
>>>> You are repeating the same false claim with out any self-reflection. 
>>>> It has been pointed out that there are many errors in this proof.
>>>> Why repeating such errors?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop ebp
>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret
>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>>>>>
>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138cc
>>>>> [00002172][001138bc][001138c0] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>> [00002173][001138bc][001138c0] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>> [00002175][001138b8][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
>>>>> [0000217a][001138b4][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call 
>>>>> HHH(DDD)
>>>>
>>>> The trace stops and hides what happens when 000015d2 is called.
>>>> Olcott is hiding the conditional branch instructions in the recursion.
>>>>
>>>
>>> *Here is the full trace where nothing is hidden*
>>> https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
>>
>> On page 36 of that "trace"
>>     [0000128c][0010379f][00000018] e8e6f4ffff call 00000777
>> is not followed by the trace of 00000777. Instead the trace continues
>> with the next instruction after the return without any comment about
>> the omission. Meaning of 00000777 is not told.
>>
> 
> 777 is the address of Allocate, which is one of PO's "primative ops" 
> within his "computing model". (Similar to his DebugStep().)
> 
> It is implemented inside x86utm.exe (his COFF obj code runner), not in 
> the user code DDD/HHH/etc. in the obj file, and so we would not expect 
> to see any trace entries for its internals.  When the op concludes, rax 
> has the address of the allocated memory, which is consistent with how a 
> normal function would have returned the address.
> 
> You can say correctly that PO has not explained this, but then he 
> provided the full trace under protest, so it's understandable that he 
> has not previously explained everything in it.  I'm surprised that his 
> response to your post was both to ignore the question and accuse you of 
> playing sadistic head games, as the question was perfectly sensible.
> 
> You can look up the 777 address in the listing at the start of the trace 
> and it's there along with a bunch of other routines which appear to just 
> return without doing anything - those are all PO's primitive ops.  If 
> you feel a need to understand exactly what they do, you'll need to check 
> his source code!  (Although for Allocate there is no big surprise...)
> 
> 
> So your observation isn't really a problem beyond not being properly 
> explained.  An actual problem seen in his trace data is that the 
> simulation of DDD does not track the behaviour of the unsimulated DDD.  
> I.e. his simulation is incorrect.  (PO knows about that but claims it 
> doesn't matter, although on other occasions he still claims the 
> simulation is correct.)
> 
> 
> Mike.
> 

But the bigger error that totally negates this trace is if you at where 
it begins, it is at program address 00002197, which just the page before 
is shown to be the address of _main.

Since HHH was not given the address of main to start with, this can not 
be the trace that HHH itself is generating and looking at, but is 
instead the trace of the running of that top level HHH.

Since that shows the trace isn't what he claims it is, nothing it says 
means anything for his argument.

In fact, the way the trace is produced, it is clear that the tracing 
code doesn't care about what level of simulation it is working but calls 
to "DebugStep" just inject the data they trace as part of the code that 
is being traced, which isn't actually what is happening in the processor.

This seems to be part of the source for his confusion, and the tool he 
uses to try to spread his lies.

such results should, at most, be inserted as a comment about what the 
results computed as meta-logic of the code just emulated did.

But of course, noting that this second layer is just meta-results, and 
that the original emulator always had the option of stopping its 
emulation ruins his argument that the recursion is necessarily infinite.

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Hypothetical possibilities Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-23 10:32 +0300
  Re: Hypothetical possibilities olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-23 09:41 -0500
    Re: Hypothetical possibilities Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-24 12:01 +0300
      Re: Hypothetical possibilities olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-24 08:38 -0500
        Re: Hypothetical possibilities Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-26 11:05 +0300
          Re: Hypothetical possibilities olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-26 08:58 -0500
            Re: Hypothetical possibilities Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-27 09:54 +0300
              Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-27 08:55 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2024-07-27 14:28 +0000
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-27 09:45 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2024-07-27 14:59 +0000
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception based rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-27 10:30 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception based rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-28 11:12 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-28 11:10 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-29 11:20 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal joes <noreply@example.org> - 2024-07-29 20:20 +0000
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-29 15:36 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-30 09:41 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-30 13:42 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-07-30 21:21 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-30 20:32 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal by olcott--- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-07-30 21:34 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-30 21:13 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid lying rebuttal by Olcott --- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-07-30 23:19 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal by Olcott--- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-07-30 23:19 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-30 23:09 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-07-31 10:44 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-31 10:14 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-07-31 22:01 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-31 16:23 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years joes <noreply@example.org> - 2024-08-01 07:20 +0000
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 06:28 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 13:46 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 07:34 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 15:03 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 08:11 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 16:26 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- INCorrect emulation has been proven for three years Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-01 19:33 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Correct emulation has been proven for three years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 10:10 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 07:20 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 15:12 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 08:29 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 16:23 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 09:30 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 16:36 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 10:49 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 21:40 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof joes <noreply@example.org> - 2024-08-01 16:11 +0000
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 11:32 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-01 21:30 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 16:03 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-02 10:13 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 06:24 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof *FAILED* Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 10:41 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-08-03 10:25 +0200
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 11:54 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Completly incorrect Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-01 19:33 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-02 13:19 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 06:21 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof *FAILED* Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 10:41 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 11:58 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-02 13:12 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 06:11 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof *FAILS* Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 10:41 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 12:07 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-08-02 18:39 +0100
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 12:57 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof *FAILED* Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 14:32 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 14:25 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-08-02 23:23 +0100
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 17:35 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 19:15 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-02 23:42 +0100
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2024-08-02 17:55 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 19:17 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-08-03 02:19 +0100
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 21:56 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof -- more details olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 22:30 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete FAILED Proof -- more details Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-03 11:33 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2024-08-02 22:32 -0600
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof --- Halt State olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-03 08:27 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof --- halt state olcott <abc@def.com> - 2024-08-05 19:26 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-05 03:33 +0100
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <abc@def.com> - 2024-08-04 22:56 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-05 07:40 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <abc@def.com> - 2024-08-05 19:41 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Completely *FAILED* Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-05 21:32 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <abc@def.com> - 2024-08-05 19:34 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-02 19:12 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-08-03 04:11 +0100
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-02 22:36 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 12:29 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Complete Proof Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 12:14 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-01 11:02 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 07:08 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 12:31 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-28 11:04 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-29 11:17 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-30 09:44 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-30 16:11 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-01 11:14 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 07:23 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- stupid rebuttal Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 12:35 +0300
              Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Sipser approved criteria olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-27 09:41 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Sipser approved criteria Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2024-07-27 14:50 +0000
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Sipser approved criteria olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-27 09:59 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Sipser approved criteria Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-28 11:21 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Sipser approved criteria olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-29 11:25 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- Sipser approved criteria Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-07-28 11:13 +0300
              Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-07-30 16:35 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-01 11:20 +0300
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-08-01 07:25 -0500
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-08-01 19:33 -0400
                Re: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-03 12:42 +0300

csiph-web