Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.theory > #105778

Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise

From Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups comp.theory, sci.logic
Subject Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise
Date 2024-05-30 21:37 -0400
Organization i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID <v3b9kl$2im02$2@i2pn2.org> (permalink)
References (21 earlier) <v38ogh$1grj4$1@dont-email.me> <v38pr0$2fohv$6@i2pn2.org> <v38thu$1hf5c$2@dont-email.me> <v39o04$2h667$1@i2pn2.org> <v3a11j$1ni4n$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 5/30/24 10:04 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/30/2024 6:30 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/29/24 11:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/29/2024 9:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/29/24 10:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/29/2024 9:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/29/24 9:48 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/29/2024 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/29/24 9:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/2024 8:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/24 8:59 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/2024 7:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/24 8:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/2024 7:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/24 7:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/2024 6:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/24 2:31 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/29/2024 1:14 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a bit of respect?  Mike specifically asked 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you not to cite his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name as a back up for your points.  Why do you keep 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He does it to try to rope more people in.  It's the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same ploy as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> insulting people by name.  It's hard to ignore being 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maligned in public
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by a fool.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Thanks for validating my simplified encoding of the Linz*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I really did believe that Ben Bacarisse was lying when 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I said it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At the time I was talking about the easily verified 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fact of the actual
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution trace of fully operational code and everyone 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was denying the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easily verified facts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> function in C
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 00       int H(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 01       int D(ptr p)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02       {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 03         int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04         if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06         return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07       }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09       int main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10       {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11         H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12         return 0;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 13       }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It turns out that two dozen people are easily proven 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrong when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they claimed that the correct simulation of the input 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to H(D,D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the behavior of int main() { D(D); }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How is that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When D is correctly simulated by H using an x86 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulator the only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way that the emulated D can reach its own emulated 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at line 06 and halt is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) The x86 machine code of D is emulated incorrectly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) The x86 machine code of D is emulated in the wrong 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which isn't a "Correct Simulation" by the definition 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that allow the relating of a "Simulation" to the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior of an input.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right the execution trace of D simulated by pure function 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an x86 emulator must show that D cannot possibly reach 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated final state and halt or the simulation of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language of D is incorrect or in the wrong order.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, you aren't going to resolve the question but just keep 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up with your contradiction that H is simulating a template 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (that doesn't HAVE any instrucitons of H in it) but also 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DOES simulate those non-existance instructions by LYING 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about what it does and simulating a SPECIFIC instance that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it LIES behaves just like DIFFERENT specific instatces.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will give you the benefit of the doubt and call that an 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> honest
>>>>>>>>>>>>> misunderstanding. I have much more empathy for you now that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I found
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Linz really did say words that you could construe as 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you did.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The infinite set of every H/D pair specified by the template
>>>>>>>>>>>>> where D is correctly simulated by pure simulator H or pure 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> function
>>>>>>>>>>>>> H never has any D reach its own simulated final state and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But the question ISN'T about the SIMULATED D, but about the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior of the actual PROGRAM/MACHINE D
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This seems to be your blind spot.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ∃H  ∈ Turing_Machines
>>>>>>>>>>> ∀x  ∈ Turing_Machines_Descriptions
>>>>>>>>>>> ∀y  ∈ Finite_Strings
>>>>>>>>>>> such that H(x,y) = Halts(x,y)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not really the above formalization does not can cannot
>>>>>>>>>>> specify Turing Machines as the input to any decider H.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Then what is x representing?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> x <is> a finite string Turing machine description that 
>>>>>>>>> SPECIFIES behavior. The term: "representing" is inaccurate.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, it specifies the machine, and thus, though that, the behavior.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we assume that a decider takes an actual Turing machine as its
>>>>>>> input that is correct otherwise that is one level of indirection
>>>>>>> away from what we are really looking at.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The people have perpetuated this mistake for many decades never
>>>>>>> actually made it not a mistake.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to define what you mean by "Indirection", because you 
>>>>>> aren't using it in the normal manner.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have conclusively proven that the behavior of the correct
>>>>> simulation of the x86 code of D by pure function H has
>>>>> different behavior than the direct execution of D(D).
>>>>
>>>> But the question isn't about the "Correcgt Simulation" and 
>>>> especially based on YOUR definition. So you haven't proven ANYTHING 
>>>> about the question except that you don't understand it and are just 
>>>> an ignorant pathological liar with a reckless disregard for the trutn.
>>>>
>>>> You are just showing that you have successfully brainwashed yourself 
>>>> into beleiving your own lies.
>>>>
>>>
>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>> 00       int H(ptr p, ptr i);
>>> 01       int D(ptr p)
>>> 02       {
>>> 03         int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
>>> 04         if (Halt_Status)
>>> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
>>> 06         return Halt_Status;
>>> 07       }
>>> 08
>>> 09       int main()
>>> 10       {
>>> 11         H(D,D);
>>> 12         return 0;
>>> 13       }
>>>
>>> Like I said *Try and Prove otherwise*
>>> The actual fully operational code DOES INVOKE RECURSIVE SIMULATION.
>>>
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:113075
>>> [00001c22][00113061][00113065] 55         push ebp
>>> [00001c23][00113061][00113065] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>> [00001c25][0011305d][00103031] 51         push ecx
>>> [00001c26][0011305d][00103031] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> [00001c29][00113059][00001c22] 50         push eax       ; push DD
>>> [00001c2a][00113059][00001c22] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> [00001c2d][00113055][00001c22] 51         push ecx       ; push DD
>>> [00001c2e][00113051][00001c33] e80ff7ffff call 00001342  ; call HH
>>> New slave_stack at:14da95
>>
>> The following doesn't actually happen per your latest definitions.
>>
> 
> Sure it does try and prove otherwise.

Since YOUR DEFINITION of a correct simulation says it follows the exact 
sequence of x86 instructions, GOING INTO H.

So, the call HH must be followd

> 
>> call HH needs be followed by the instructions of HH that are being 
>> simulated.
>>
> 
> It does I just screen out the 250 pages of them so that we
> can see exactly what D is doing. We have no actual need to
> see these pages because the fact that D is correctly simulated
> by H is proven by the provided execution trace of D.

And thus you LIE and commit logic errors as the two are not equivalent.

> 
>> I guess you are just admitting that you are nothing but a LIAR.
>>
> 
> *Please quit calling me a Liar. Others here have called you out on this*
> Calling me a liar without even being able to point out any mistake is a
> pitiful lack of professional decorum.

I will point out that YOU started it.

> 
> The professional way to handle this is this:
> I believe that you are mistaken here is the mistake and
> here are the reasons why I believe it is a mistake.

But you don't listen to that.

Tell you want, if you will start actually ANSWERING the errors pointed 
out, and stop just repeating your FALSE STATEMENTS, I will stop calling 
you a LIAR, (but will continue to point out statement you make that are 
clear lies, if they have already been pointed out in the past, so it 
can't be an "honest mistake"


Note, you need to make a clear and unambigous promise to not repeat 
statments that have had errors pointed out in them, EVEN IF YOU DON'T 
SEE THE ERROR, until that is resolved.

No claiming you can't get side-tracked, if your arguement depends on a 
statement that has been questioned, you can't just leave that behind.

Note, this means you can't say the refutation is just wrong because you 
must be right, you need to SHOW why you are right, with ACTUAL SOURCES 
for you claims.

> 
> In some cases just calling someone a liar without even showing
> that they are incorrect could result in monetary damages.
> This just cost Fox "fake" news $787 million.

Except that every time I have called you a liar, it is after pointing 
out the lie you have repeated.

> 
>> Maybe you just don't understand what the words you use actuually mean.
>>
> 
> What I actually found (and it was very reassuring) is that *you* don't
> know what my words mean. It is very reassuring because now I know what
> I was mistaking for head games and deception on your part was actually
> ordinary misunderstanding.

I don't think YOU know what your words mean. You clearly don't know what 
the words mean as terms of the art.

> 
> *Don't call me a liar, and don't even say that I am incorrect*
> *until after you point out the exact error AND and provide the*
> *complete reasoning why you believe it is an error*

I have, many times, and you just ignore it.

> 
> On the very rare occasions where you did this we found that it
> was your own misunderstanding all along.
> 

Nope.

I will point out that you have admitted to having a mental disorder that 
gives you incorrect and only partial understanding of the world around 
you. It is incumberant on YOU to be mindful of this and not just ignore 
the facts that you don't want to face.

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


Thread

D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 11:16 -0500
  Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-28 22:04 -0400
    Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 21:23 -0500
      Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-28 23:38 -0400
        Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 22:49 -0500
          Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-29 12:14 +0300
            Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 08:24 -0500
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 19:01 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 20:09 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 19:21 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 20:47 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 19:53 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 21:02 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 20:12 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 21:25 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 20:55 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 22:25 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 21:36 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 22:55 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 22:48 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-05-30 09:11 +0000
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 08:11 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-30 19:58 +0200
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 21:37 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-30 12:11 +0200
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 07:33 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-31 11:51 +0300
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-31 11:15 +0200
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-31 16:12 +0300
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 07:32 -0400
          Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 07:31 -0400
            Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 08:49 -0500
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2024-05-29 15:40 +0000
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 11:17 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-05-29 18:08 +0100
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 12:32 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 13:08 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-05-29 19:14 +0100
                Two dozen people were simply wrong olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 13:31 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2024-05-29 20:17 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 15:25 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-05-29 22:54 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 16:14 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong (including Olcott) Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 18:57 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 20:09 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 19:17 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 20:48 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 19:59 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 21:07 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 20:15 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 21:24 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 20:37 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 22:24 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 20:48 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 22:27 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 21:32 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 22:55 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 22:58 -0500
                Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 07:30 -0400
                Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 09:04 -0500
                Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 21:37 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-05-30 09:08 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 08:21 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-31 11:08 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- Mike Terry olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 10:04 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-30 10:40 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 08:31 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 21:37 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 20:54 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 22:15 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 21:32 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 22:51 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 21:58 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 23:15 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 22:27 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 07:16 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 09:10 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 17:36 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 17:08 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 18:46 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 17:54 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 19:33 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 18:57 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 20:39 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 20:10 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 21:35 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 21:08 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 22:25 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 21:40 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 07:22 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 10:30 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 11:56 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 11:13 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 18:19 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 11:24 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 20:40 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 13:44 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 21:04 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 15:11 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 10:56 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:37 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:02 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:13 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 14:20 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-02 09:18 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:54 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 12:27 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 11:38 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 13:22 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 12:27 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 13:33 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 12:44 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 13:56 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 13:07 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 14:21 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 13:31 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 14:43 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 13:46 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:58 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 15:03 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 15:23 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 16:35 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 20:54 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 14:51 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 16:29 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 15:37 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 17:13 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 16:24 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 18:30 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 17:40 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 19:02 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 18:12 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 19:27 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 22:33 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 07:51 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:19 -0500
                Re: Olcott is simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 13:22 -0400
                Re: Olcott is simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 12:59 -0500
                Re: Olcott is simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 14:13 -0400
                DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:29 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 15:05 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 14:13 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2024-06-02 15:22 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 14:34 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 16:11 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 15:21 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 16:32 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-03 02:14 +0200
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 15:50 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 16:58 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 16:25 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 17:43 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 17:05 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 18:20 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 17:44 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 19:45 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 20:45 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 22:24 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 21:54 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 23:13 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 22:20 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 10:10 +0200
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 07:46 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 21:49 +0200
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-03 20:56 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-03 07:14 -0400
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 07:42 -0500
                Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 21:51 +0200
                Re: Olcott is simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:34 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 11:19 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 11:13 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 11:03 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:41 -0500
                Re: Olcott is simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 13:22 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:13 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:32 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:49 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:53 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:59 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 15:07 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:55 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:53 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 20:26 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 15:32 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-02 11:29 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:08 -0500
                Re: Olcott is simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 13:22 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 12:44 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 08:13 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 17:35 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 13:19 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 21:51 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-03 20:56 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 14:49 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 11:01 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Wasell <wasell@example.com> - 2024-06-01 10:36 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 09:00 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 11:46 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 10:58 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 12:08 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 11:18 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 12:33 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 11:46 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 16:29 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 15:35 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 17:15 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 16:27 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 18:30 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 17:37 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 19:02 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-02 09:36 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:58 -0500
                Re: Olcott is simply wrong --- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 13:22 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:16 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:37 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:51 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:57 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 21:01 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 14:10 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 15:18 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 09:37 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 07:24 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 21:53 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 15:08 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 10:02 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-02 17:55 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:08 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 14:18 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:36 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:42 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:53 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:58 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 09:40 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2024-06-02 21:02 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 11:24 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:47 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:24 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:39 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:55 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 14:01 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 09:50 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 14:59 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-02 21:19 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down --- canonical immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:54 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:49 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 10:57 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 10:17 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 17:32 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 10:51 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 12:02 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 18:06 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 11:22 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 12:34 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:54 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 19:12 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:52 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 19:04 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 15:01 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 23:35 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 11:49 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 18:59 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 18:41 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 13:45 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply right --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-02 09:46 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 14:48 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-31 11:30 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 10:13 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 13:03 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 08:16 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 17:49 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 13:20 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-04 11:40 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-04 12:46 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-31 11:22 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 10:07 -0500
                Re: H is an incorrect x86 emulator immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-30 12:24 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-30 12:04 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-01 11:23 +0300
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 10:09 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 17:18 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 10:44 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-01 17:58 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 20:51 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 19:02 +0000
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 14:58 -0500
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 16:28 -0400
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 23:36 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 11:28 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-02 12:56 +0200
                Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong -- Only basis for rebuttal in the last 3 years Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-02 11:08 +0300
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 08:56 -0500
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:39 +0200
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 13:46 -0500
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-02 20:57 +0200
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 14:03 -0500
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 15:16 -0400
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-02 21:20 +0200
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-02 21:24 +0200
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-02 15:01 -0400
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 13:13 +0300
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 08:17 -0500
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 17:39 +0300
                Re: Deciders are ONLY accountable for their actual inputs --- "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-03 21:55 +0200
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
  Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 09:43 -0500
    Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-05-30 15:59 +0100
      Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 10:21 -0500
        Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-05-30 17:13 +0100
          Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 11:55 -0500
            Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2024-05-30 21:51 +0100
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- Try to prove otherwise olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 16:22 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- Try to prove otherwise immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-30 23:50 +0200
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- Mike Terry olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 09:46 -0500
            Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 21:37 -0400
    Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-30 17:20 +0200
      Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 10:30 -0500
        Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-30 17:58 +0200
      Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 12:00 -0500
        Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-30 20:50 +0200
          Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 14:01 -0500
            Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-30 21:32 +0200
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 15:15 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-30 22:59 +0200
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 16:27 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-30 23:51 +0200
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2024-05-30 21:10 -0600
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 22:33 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 07:16 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2024-05-30 21:48 -0600
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2024-05-30 21:52 -0600
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 23:06 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-31 10:41 +0200
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 07:16 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2024-05-30 21:14 -0600
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 22:36 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-31 10:02 +0200
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 09:33 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-31 07:23 -0400
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 18:07 +0000
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 13:11 -0500
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 14:23 -0400
    Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-30 21:37 -0400
  Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-31 16:10 +0300
    Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 10:44 -0500
      Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-01 11:20 +0300
        Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 09:52 -0500
          Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 11:08 -0400
          Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-01 18:56 +0000
            Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 14:55 -0500
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-01 16:29 -0400
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-01 23:36 +0200
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-02 09:24 +0000
                Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:55 -0500
          Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-02 11:24 +0300
            Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 09:04 -0500
              Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 13:36 +0300

csiph-web