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

Groups > sci.logic > #335930

Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie?

From Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups comp.theory, sci.logic
Subject Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie?
Date 2024-06-24 19:17 -0400
Organization i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID <v5cuql$10m6o$1@i2pn2.org> (permalink)
References (23 earlier) <v5an1e$o6ib$1@dont-email.me> <v5ao4p$smd4$10@i2pn2.org> <v5ap10$odqa$1@dont-email.me> <v5bjn9$ursa$1@i2pn2.org> <v5bsu0$v0vb$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/24/24 9:39 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/24/2024 6:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/23/24 11:26 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/23/2024 10:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/23/24 10:52 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/23/2024 9:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 10:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 9:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 10:09 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 9:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 9:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 8:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 8:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 7:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 8:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 6:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 7:34 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 5:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/24 6:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You know what the freak I was talking from prior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussions unless your brain is so damaged that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can't remember anything from one post to the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the case that you affirm that your brain <is>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this damaged then I humbly apologize.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, you don't know what you are talking about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you insist on lying about this verified fact?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55               push ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H0(DDD)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d               pop ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3               ret
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> According to the semantics of the x86 programming 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when DDD correctly emulated by H0 calls H0(DDD) this 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot possibly return.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I won't say it can't be true, but it hasn't been 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proven, largely because it seems you don't know how 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to do a formal logic proof.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Liar
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then where is the proof?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And were is the simulation that H0 did?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Failure to show where you ACTUALLY PROVED it just shows 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you a liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remember the parts of a Formal Logic Proof:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You could disagree that 2 + 3 = 5 on this same Jackass 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 + 3 = 5 ON THE FREAKING BASIS OF THE SEMANTICS OF 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ARITHMETIC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I seen proofs that 2 + 3 = 5
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And that is done on a proof that uses the semantics of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aritmetic.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The phrase "Semantics of Arithmetic" though, is not a proof.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> According to the semantics of the x86 programming language
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when DDD correctly emulated by H0 calls H0(DDD) this call
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot possibly return.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then try to prove it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will not try any prove that 2 + 3 = 5, if you deny
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it then you are a liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And you don't need to, as it has been done.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, showing how 2 + 3 = 5 would help show you how to right 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> an actual proof.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Likewise for the behavior of DDD correctly simulated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by H0. A correct x86 emulator already proved this three
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years ago and you still try and get away with lying about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. Just a fallacy of proof by example, which isn't a proof.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have gotten it down to this ONLY LIARS WILL DISAGREE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT MY PROOF IS CORRECT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHAT PROOF?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No proof, just means your statement is just a LIE.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD correctly emulated by H0 DOES NOT HALT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> TYPE ERROR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Correct Simutation by H is not part of the definition of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> HALTING.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just proves your ignorance of what you talk about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Likewise for P correctly emulated by H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> AGAIN TYPE ERROR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Correct Simutation by H is not part of the definition of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> HALTING.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just proves your ignorance of what you talk about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr2)();
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int H(ptr2 P, ptr2 I);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int P(ptr2 x)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    H(P,P);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _P()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020e2] 55               push ebp         ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020e3] 8bec             mov ebp,esp      ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020e5] 51               push ecx         ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020e6] 8b4508           mov eax,[ebp+08] ; parameter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020e9] 50               push eax         ; push parameter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020ea] 8b4d08           mov ecx,[ebp+08] ; parameter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020ed] 51               push ecx         ; push parameter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020ee] e82ff3ffff       call 00001422    ; call H(P,P)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020f3] 83c408           add esp,+08
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020f6] 8945fc           mov [ebp-04],eax
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020f9] 837dfc00         cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020fd] 7402             jz 00002101
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000020ff] ebfe             jmp 000020ff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002101] 8b45fc           mov eax,[ebp-04]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002104] 8be5             mov esp,ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002106] 5d               pop ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002107] c3               ret
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0038) [00002107]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And, P(P) Halts since you have indicated that H(P,P) to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> returns 0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> VERIFIED FACT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A verified fact to a God damned liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nope, actual verified fact, one YOU have even proven and 
>>>>>>>>>>> agreed to.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> SO, I guess you are just showing you are just a LIAR.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The actual verified fact is that when P is correctly emulated
>>>>>>>>>>>> by H according to the semantics of the x86 language that the
>>>>>>>>>>>> call from P to H(P,P) CANNOT POSSIBLY RETURN.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But that isn't halting, so saying it shows non-halting is 
>>>>>>>>>>> just a LIE, and proves your ignorance of the topic.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So you agree that the call cannot possibly return
>>>>>>>>>> or are you going to keep lying about that?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, I am saying the call WILL return in the direct execution, 
>>>>>>>>> which is what matters.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So finally after three years you quit lying about the
>>>>>>>> behavior of P correctly simulated by H.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It should not have taken that long to get you to quit
>>>>>>>> being dishonest.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When did I ever say anything like that about the correct 
>>>>>>> simulation by H.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Many many times, dozens to hundreds of times you have
>>>>> provided your incorrect opinion on D correctly simulated by H.
>>>>
>>>> SHOW ONE.
>>>>
>>>> WHere I said that H could simulate to there.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You tried to get away with the lie that P correctly simulated
>>> by H had to have the same behavior as the directly executed
>>> P(P) for three years.
>>
>> Different statement. The instruction seen in the "correct" emulation 
>> of P by H will see EXACTLY the same instructions as seen in the direct 
>> execution of P, up to the point that H stops simulating.
>>
> 
> *That is not true*
> I just ran it to make sure that my current code does this.

So, what instruction CORRECTLY emulated differed in behavior to the 
directly executed instruction.

and HOW? since your DEFINITION of "Correctly Emulated" is emulated 
according to the specification of the x86 instruction set, which is what 
the direct execution will also do.

If you "ran it" to verify, why haven't you posted that trace?

Probably because it would show that you are lying,

It likely does the same mistake you keep on doing of NOT actually 
correctly emulating the call instruction.

> 
> The call from DD to HH(DD,DD) when DD is correctly emulated
> by HH cannot possibly return. This is NOT the same behavior
> as the directly executed DD(DD).

So? it will STILL follow the exact same sequence of instructions as the 
directly executed, until HH decides to stop.

> 
> The call from DD to HH(DD,DD) when DD is correctly emulated
> by HH1 DOES return. This is the same behavior as the directly
> executed DD(DD).

Right, because the trace goes longer to the return instrucition.

The emulated by HH trace, doesn't show that the program will never 
return, just that the PARTIAL emulation doesn't get there.

> 
> https://liarparadox.org/HH1(DD,DD)_Executon_Trace.pdf

Still not the right trace, I thought you said you looked at it?

_main()
[00002192] 55     push ebp

The begining of your trace:

machine   stack     stack     machine
  address   address   data      code
  ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
[00002192][00103835][00000000] 55         push ebp
[00002193][00103835][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
[00002195][00103831][00002162] 6862210000 push 00002162
[0000219a][0010382d][00002162] 6862210000 push 00002162
[0000219f][00103829][000021a4] e89ef1ffff call 00001342

So it didn't begin at DDD as it needs to.

You don''t seem to understand what is required, showing your utter 
ignorance (or pathology)

> 
>> Thus, the simulation can not claim there is a different behavior of 
>> the actual program (not just emulation by H) between executed and 
>> emulated. H sees a sub-set of the behavior, not a "different" behavior.
>>
>>>
>>> If you really don't remember saying this your brain is much
>>> more damaged than I ever thought.
>>
>> You are missing fine points in the statement, probably because you 
>> don't understand them
>>
>>>
>>> *In any case we will remain on this single point*
>>>
>>> The call from P to H(P,P) when P is correctly emulated
>>> by H cannot possibly return.
>>
>> And who cares? It isn't what Halting is defined to be, so has no 
>> relevance to the Halting Problem.
>>
>> You need to prove relevance before you can work your argument.
>>
>>>
>>> for the next 10,000 messages if you really want to look
>>> foolish that long.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Go ahead, stall your argument till you die.
>

Back to sci.logic | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 08:40 -0500
  Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? (typo corrected) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 09:00 -0500
  Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 14:20 -0400
    Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 16:41 -0500
      Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 17:49 -0400
        Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 17:04 -0500
          Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 18:35 -0400
            Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 17:45 -0500
              Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 18:58 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 18:34 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 19:44 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 19:08 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 20:24 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 20:00 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 21:13 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 20:20 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 21:30 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 20:36 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 22:00 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 21:09 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 22:16 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 21:27 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 22:31 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 21:38 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 21:52 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 23:11 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 22:26 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 07:02 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 08:39 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 19:17 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 18:38 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 19:57 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 08:42 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 19:19 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 18:43 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 19:59 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 19:02 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 20:06 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 19:34 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 20:54 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 20:05 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 21:13 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 20:22 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 21:24 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure (typo) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 20:07 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure (typo) Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 21:22 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 20:32 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 21:51 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 20:55 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 22:02 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 21:17 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 22:25 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 21:21 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 22:26 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 21:38 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 22:48 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 21:52 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 06:59 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 22:13 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 07:04 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 08:02 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 21:47 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 20:59 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 22:17 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 21:21 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 22:54 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 22:25 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 23:32 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 22:37 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 06:58 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 08:33 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 19:41 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 18:50 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 19:52 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 19:19 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 20:38 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 19:24 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 20:40 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 20:12 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 21:21 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 21:10 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 22:38 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 21:46 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 23:16 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 22:37 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-27 07:34 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-27 08:21 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-27 19:57 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-27 22:25 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-28 07:44 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-28 07:28 -0500
                Re: Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-28 09:33 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-28 23:49 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 23:09 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-25 09:14 +0000
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 20:33 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 22:03 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 21:13 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 22:28 -0400
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-24 19:44 +0000
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 15:05 -0500
                Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 19:19 -0400
  Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 07:02 -0400
    Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 08:48 -0500
      Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 19:47 -0400

csiph-web