Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #134609
| Subject | Re: wow richard is /still/ a retard |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| References | (24 earlier) <10e0an1$3s5i3$1@dont-email.me> <Yi5NQ.1331734$xYr1.1156077@fx14.iad> <10e32n5$mtn6$3@dont-email.me> <eIeNQ.94671$fBxc.81915@fx08.iad> <10e3u2a$sj9i$7@dont-email.me> |
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
| Message-ID | <jcfNQ.224681$ol44.111530@fx33.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Forte - www.forteinc.com |
| Date | 2025-10-31 23:33 -0400 |
On 10/31/25 11:16 PM, dart200 wrote: > On 10/31/25 7:59 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 10/31/25 3:29 PM, dart200 wrote: >>> On 10/31/25 9:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 10/30/25 2:27 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>> On 10/29/25 8:42 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 10/29/2025 10:23 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>> On 10/29/25 6:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 10/29/25 12:24 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 10/29/25 4:29 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 10/28/25 11:23 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 10/28/25 6:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/28/25 9:41 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/28/25 6:34 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/28/2025 5:43 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not my argument u fucking useless boomer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, how do you solve the halting problem? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> with reflection, something u lack as a useless fucking boomer >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Which you can't say how to do, because your only answer is >>>>>>>>>>>> to define that you can. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> we haven't even gotten the point of working out the >>>>>>>>>>> ramifications of what i've defined, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Because you haven't actually defined what you are doing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> blatant lie >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Really, show where you have ACTUALLY fully defined your >>>>>>>> computation machine to a level you can actually analyize one. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> TMs with a modification, specifically adding full mechanical >>>>>>> reflection to TMs in order to produce Reflective TMs (RTMs) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> adding full mechanical reflection just means it gets a single >>>>>>> instruction that dumps *all* this information to the tape, at the >>>>>>> head, when that instruction is called: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) machine description >>>>>>> 2) initial tape state >>>>>>> 3) current instruction >>>>>>> 4) current tape state >>>>>>> >>>>>>> call it REFLECT, if u will... this information allows a >>>>>>> computation to know exactly where it is in the overall runtime of >>>>>>> computation, and with that it can subvert semantic paradoxes like >>>>>>> the halting problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> you have to understand this is a *mechanical* modification to >>>>>>> turing machines, not a computational one. much like how RTMs can >>>>>>> move a head left/right, or write 0/1 to the tape ... they >>>>>>> mechanically just do this operation when the instruction is called. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *these mechanics are (relatively) simple and self-evidentially >>>>>>> possible and therefore mathematically feasible.* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> BUT, let me try a step deeper, and quote turing at you from his >>>>>>> original paper on computable numbers: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> /We may compare a man in the process of computing a real number to a >>>>>>> machine which is only capable of a finite number of conditions/ >>>>>>> [Tur36] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> THE ENTIRE JUSTIFICATION FOR TURING MACHINES RESTS SQUARELY ON >>>>>>> THE NOTION OF "CAN A MAN MECHANICALLY UNDERTAKE THESE STATE >>>>>>> TRANSITIONS" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) if a man is running thru the steps of a computation, then >>>>>>> obviously he has access the full machine description, or how else >>>>>>> the fuck is he doing any of these state transitions??? therefore >>>>>>> he obviously can dump the machine description, in whatever format >>>>>>> he has it in, to the tape when REFLECT is encountered. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2) if a man is running thru the steps of a computation, then >>>>>>> obviously he can to the side save the initial tape in a "buffer" >>>>>>> that than cannot be overwritten. with that he can can obviously >>>>>>> dump the initial tape state to the tape whenever REFLECT is >>>>>>> encountered. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3) if a man is running thru the steps of a computation, then >>>>>>> obviously he has access input of a particular transition, and >>>>>>> therefore can dump that input to the tape when REFLECT is >>>>>>> encountered, in whatever format he encounters it in. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 4) if a man is running thru the steps of a computation ... he can >>>>>>> obviously duplicate the tape when REFLECT is called. or more >>>>>>> precisely he can save it into a buffer, and dump from the buffer >>>>>>> after putting 1-3 on the tape. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> THAT IS THE SAME LEVEL OF FORMAT JUSTIFICATION TURING ULTIMATELY >>>>>>> GIVES FOR ANY COMPUTING MACHINE. SERIOUSLY READ HIS FUCKING ESSAY >>>>>>> YOU DORK >>>>>>> >>>>>>> please tell me where u are confused, not how u think i'm wrong >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I can finally see the gist of what you are saying >>>>>> and it seems to be very similar to my idea. >>>>> >>>>> like i've said polcott, i consider you having a half-way solution. >>>>> u have something that's executable for sure, and that is a definite >>>>> improvement over total undecidability. >>>>> >>>>> but it's not totally epistemically useful, it still doesn't / >>>>> effectively compute/ the halting function in a *general* manner. >>>>> >>>>> i'm proposing something that's both executable *and* epistemically >>>>> useful for that purpose. >>>>> >>>>> the RTM i'm proposing here is just the underlying theoretical >>>>> mechanisms that can be used to produce a theoretically coherent >>>>> context-dependent decider, >>>>> >>>>> which can then be used to /effectively compute/ the halting >>>>> function irrespective of semantic paradoxes ... >>>>> >>>>> something that is in total a step beyond the mere executability >>>>> that you are proposing. >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, the problem you have is that you make the same error and try to >>>> redefine the question, and allow your machine to give wrong answers. >>> >>> it's not a "wrong" answer if it contains no information to be wrong >>> about, and it's only given in a situation where there's no "right" >>> answer. >> >> But their is a right answer for every actual D based on every actual H. >> >> It just isn't the answer that H gives. >> >>> >>> how is it reasonable to expect a decider to respond truthfully to a >>> situation that would only make that truth untrue >> >> Because deciders are just deterministic processes with a fixed algorithm. > > right, and context can be an input to the determinism > > console.trace() isn't nondeterministic, it's context dependent > >> >> Note, the system DOES understand that some problems turn out to be >> uncomputable, so no decider exists that can be correct for all inputs. >> Nothing wrong with that, it just means that any decider that wants to >> try to claim to solve it will be wrong for some input. >> >> The key point here is the question can't be asked until after a >> decider steps up to make the claim, as the prove-it-wrong input is >> different for every possible decider, and thus, by the time the >> question can be asked, the deciders result for that input was already >> determined by its algorithm. For the decider it isn't a matter of >> being "truthful", it is just doing what it was programmed to do. >> >> It becomes a matter of correctness, not truthfulness. >> >> It is the creator of the algoritm to which truthfulness is applied, >> and claiming that it will give the right answer when it doesn't shows >> that his claim wasn't truthful. >> > > there's no "correct" answer to a pathological question of halts(und) on > this line: > > und = () -> halts(und) && loop_forever() Which isn't a computation if your symbology means that halts is taken from the context that the symbol und is used in. Sorry, you are just showing you don't know the meaning of the words. > > and the resolution is just to give a non-answer, so i split the decider > into two halves and made false a non-answer. it cannot be a > contradiction because it doesn't give information /in that moment/ about > und() to contradict. But since you are starting with the same category error of Olcott, you get the same nonsense he does. The category for the input to a Halt Decider is the representation of a Computation. By DEFINITION, this has a FULLY defined algorithm, and thus NOT a closure. If you want to try to define your own theory of computation that uses a broader defintion, go ahead, the problem is you will find you can do litle with it, and that the semantic paradox you are complaining about is totally due to you altered definition of a computation. > > yes this does mean maybe /false/ could be returned everywhere, but > that's not fucking interesting ... nor does it give /effective > computability/ in regards to the halting question. Since your input is a category error for the actual Computation Theory as classical defined, your results don't apply. > > which is the point of the context-dependent decider. halts() is required > to return /true/ only whereever both /possible/ and /truthful/ to do so. So, if you want to try to talk about this, you first need to try to develop a basic theory about context dependent Computations, to see if it can actually be useful for anything. > > if u don't agree with this, that's fine... Again, once you admit that you aren't working in the Classical Computation Theory, go ahead, just do the ground work to show what you idea can do, and don't claim it actually applies to the classical thoery. > > but you actually need to construct a contradiction, you can't just > continually make bare assertions that it's a contradiction. The problem is in your system, the basic question of "Does the Program Halt?" doesn't have a simple answer, as the behavior of the program depends on its context. We now need to ask, does this program, in this context halt (where the context needs to be fully defined, and not itself context dependent). Once you do that, then we need to provide the halt decider the context of the input, and the answer will agian be independent of the context of asking the decider, only of the context given to the decider, and again that particular H will give the wrong answer to the pathological program, by the nature of its construction. This just shows that program creation has more power that program analysis. > > it's like u never learned what a coherent argument is ... u just learned > how to barely stick together facts u memorized. >
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-23 22:33 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2025-10-24 00:12 -0600
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-24 00:30 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2025-10-24 11:43 -0600
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-24 14:43 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-10-25 10:06 +0100
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-25 02:46 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-10-25 12:01 +0100
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-25 11:23 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-25 07:23 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-25 11:09 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-25 21:09 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-26 12:57 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-27 07:30 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-27 15:57 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-27 21:14 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-27 19:38 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-28 07:54 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-28 16:20 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 17:28 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-28 17:32 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 17:33 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 17:38 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-28 17:43 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 18:34 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-28 18:41 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 20:49 -0500
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-28 18:53 -0700
Good and Bad Reviewers on comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-28 21:22 -0500
Re: Good and Bad Reviewers on comp.theory Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-28 22:54 -0400
Re: Good and Bad Reviewers on comp.theory "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:32 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-28 21:55 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-28 20:23 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-29 07:29 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 09:24 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:40 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 12:41 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 13:45 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 13:47 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 13:57 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 13:59 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:04 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:06 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:50 -0700
fuck chris dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:56 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-29 21:45 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 20:23 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS --- gist understood olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 22:42 -0500
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS --- gist understood dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-30 11:27 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS --- gist understood olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 13:52 -0500
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS --- gist understood Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-30 20:33 +0000
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS --- gist understood Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 12:18 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS --- gist understood dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 12:29 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS --- gist understood Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 22:59 -0400
wow richard is /still/ a retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 20:16 -0700
Re: wow richard is /still/ a retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 23:33 -0400
Re: wow richard is /still/ a retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 20:52 -0700
Re: wow richard is /still/ a retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-01 00:33 -0400
philosophy matters in practice dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:18 -0700
Re: philosophy matters in practice Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-01 09:19 -0400
richard the lying retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-01 09:37 -0700
Re: richard the lying retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 14:10 -0500
Re: richard the lying retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 14:10 -0500
Re: richard the lying chatbot dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 12:45 -0800
Re: richard the lying chatbot olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 14:59 -0600
Re: richard the lying chatbot Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 23:08 -0500
Re: richard the lying chatbot dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 20:42 -0800
Re: richard the lying chatbot Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 23:53 -0500
Re: richard the lying chatbot dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:03 -0800
Re: richard the lying retard Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-02 20:57 +0000
Re: richard the lying retard olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 15:00 -0600
Re: richard the lying retard Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-02 22:35 +0000
Re: richard the lying retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 19:25 -0800
Re: richard the lying retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 19:29 -0800
Re: richard the lying retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 23:22 -0500
Re: richard the lying retard Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-03 17:59 +0000
Re: richard the lying retard olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 12:05 -0600
Re: richard the lying retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-03 11:10 -0800
Re: richard the lying retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 23:13 -0500
Re: richard the lying retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:01 -0800
Re: wow richard is /still/ a retard Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-01 04:20 +0000
literal nonsene dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:05 -0700
Re: literal nonsene Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-01 16:37 +0000
Re: literal nonsene dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-01 11:28 -0700
Re: literal nonsene Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-01 20:26 +0000
Re: literal nonsene dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 17:05 -0800
Re: literal nonsene "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 17:39 -0800
Re: literal nonsene Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 23:29 -0500
Re: literal nonsene Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-03 05:35 +0000
Re: literal nonsene dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-02 22:01 -0800
Re: literal nonsene Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-03 18:32 +0000
Re: literal nonsene Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-03 18:17 +0000
Re: literal nonsene dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-03 11:38 -0800
Re: literal nonsene Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-03 20:04 +0000
Re: literal nonsene Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-03 20:07 +0000
Re: literal nonsene dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-03 12:26 -0800
wow richard is a retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 17:11 -0700
Re: wow richard is a retard --- Maybe his ADD is much worse than I thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 19:17 -0500
if only polcott ... dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 18:43 -0700
Re: if only polcott ... olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 21:02 -0500
Re: if only polcott ... Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 23:42 -0400
Re: if only polcott ... dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:11 -0700
Re: if only polcott ... olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-01 08:04 -0500
Re: wow richard is a retard --- Maybe his ADD is much worse than I thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 23:20 -0400
Re: wow richard is a retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 23:13 -0400
Re: wow richard is a retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 20:28 -0700
Re: wow richard is a retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-01 00:04 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-30 07:32 -0400
wow richard is a retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-30 11:13 -0700
Re: wow richard is a retard Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-30 19:05 +0000
Re: wow richard is a retard olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 14:17 -0500
Re: wow richard is a retard Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-30 20:17 +0000
Re: wow richard is a retard olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 15:21 -0500
Re: wow richard is a retard Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-30 20:45 +0000
Re: wow richard is a retard olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 16:02 -0500
A self-reflecting UTM olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 14:18 -0500
Re: wow richard is a retard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-30 12:27 -0700
Re: wow dart is a retard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-30 22:38 -0400
Re: wow fuck retarded richard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-30 20:58 -0700
Re: wow fuck retarded richard Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-31 04:50 +0000
Re: wow fuck retarded richard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-30 22:14 -0700
Re: wow fuck retarded richard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 12:17 -0400
Re: wow fuck retarded richard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 12:17 -0400
wow turing dunks on retarded richard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 17:57 -0700
Re: wow turing dunks on retarded richard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-01 00:11 -0400
Re: wow turing dunks on retarded richard dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-01 00:08 -0700
Re: wow turing dunks on retarded richard Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-01 09:19 -0400
Re: wow fuck retarded richard "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 12:53 -0700
wow fuck chris dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 16:40 -0700
Re: wow fuck chris Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-01 00:12 -0400
sorry polcott dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:51 -0700
Re: sorry polcott olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-01 08:08 -0500
Re: sorry polcott Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-01 09:19 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:38 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 12:41 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 13:47 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 13:49 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 13:56 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 13:57 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:00 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:01 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:30 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 12:38 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:41 -0500
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 13:55 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 13:57 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 13:48 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 13:51 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:00 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:01 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-28 21:53 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-28 21:48 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-29 07:29 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 09:21 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-29 21:46 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:42 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 12:42 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 13:42 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 13:46 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 16:09 -0500
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:13 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:21 -0700
fuck chris dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:22 -0700
Re: fuck chris "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:38 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-29 21:46 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 19:53 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 20:02 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-30 07:32 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-30 07:32 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:20 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:18 -0700
fuck chris dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:20 -0700
Re: fuck chris "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:36 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-29 21:46 -0400
fuck chris dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 19:49 -0700
Three Reviewers best ignored and some good ones olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 22:01 -0500
Re: Three Reviewers best ignored and some good ones wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 22:39 +0800
Re: Three Reviewers best ignored and some good ones wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 22:50 +0800
Re: Three Reviewers best ignored and some good ones "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 13:25 -0700
Re: Three Reviewers best ignored and some good ones olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 09:51 -0500
Re: Three Reviewers best ignored and some good ones "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-30 13:36 -0700
Re: fuck chris Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-30 07:32 -0400
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 12:43 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 12:48 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-29 14:18 -0700
fuck chris dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-10-29 14:19 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-27 18:39 -0700
Re: I WANT TO COMPUTE SEMANTIC FACTS ABOUT COMPUTATIONS Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-10-25 13:37 +0100
csiph-web