Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #141088
| From | dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math, sci.math.symbolic |
| Subject | Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? |
| Date | 2026-05-02 01:21 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10t4c5q$1rl0o$8@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <10t3de4$1pj6v$1@dont-email.me> <10t3hr1$1onjk$4@dont-email.me> <10t3jmv$1r64g$1@dont-email.me> <10t3q4s$1rl0o$1@dont-email.me> <10t3sl0$1tb81$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 5/1/26 8:56 PM, olcott wrote: > On 5/1/2026 10:13 PM, dart200 wrote: >> On 5/1/26 6:23 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 5/1/2026 7:51 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>> On 5/1/26 4:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 5/1/2026 6:27 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>> On 5/1/26 4:20 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/1/2026 6:13 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/1/26 2:53 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 5/1/2026 4:46 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/26 2:19 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/2026 4:06 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> you seem to agree the halting problem isn't solvable, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If you would fucking pay close attention: >>>>>>>>>>> The halting problem is unsolvable for the same >>>>>>>>>>> reason that the question: What time is it (yes or no)? >>>>>>>>>>> is unsolvable. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Maybe if you would repeat that to yourself >>>>>>>>>>> 10,000 times you would bother to notice that >>>>>>>>>>> I said this at least once. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ok. i don't necessarily disagree, the particular input is >>>>>>>>>> undecidable due to the form of the input itself... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> the problem i'm have with ur proposals is: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _why do i care_ ??? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't give a rat's ass why you care. >>>>>>>>> Objectively it is important because computable >>>>>>>>> truth would expose the liars and thus avoid >>>>>>>>> killing the whole planet for a few extra bucks. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> what are they even lying about??? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ >>>>>>> publication/336568434_Severe_anthropogenic_climate_change_proven_entirely_with_verifiable_facts >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> climate change is a severe existential threat i agree. >>>>>> >>>>>> i don't see how the halting problem or incompleteness relates as >>>>>> neither are even mentioned in the paper >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Because of fundamental misconceptions still exist about >>>>> "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language" >>>>> we continue to lack a reliable system that divides lies >>>>> from truth. This prevents the required quorum of the >>>>> public to implement sufficient climate change remedial >>>>> measures. >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> can we further our ability in any way shape or form with this >>>>>>>>>> understanding??? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> An infallible system of truth can be created on this >>>>>>>>> basis. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> what more truth have you proposed??? the _same_ problem remains >>>>>>>> with undecidable input... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are you fucking stupid? >>>> >>>> yes >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The halting problem is unsolvable for the same >>>>>>> reason that the question: What time is it (yes or no)? >>>>>>> is unsolvable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The halting problem is unsolvable for the same >>>>>>> reason that the question: What time is it (yes or no)? >>>>>>> is unsolvable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The halting problem is unsolvable for the same >>>>>>> reason that the question: What time is it (yes or no)? >>>>>>> is unsolvable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The halting problem is unsolvable for the same >>>>>>> reason that the question: What time is it (yes or no)? >>>>>>> is unsolvable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The halting problem is unsolvable for the same >>>>>>> reason that the question: What time is it (yes or no)? >>>>>>> is unsolvable. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ok, so the problem remains unsolvable... i'm failing to see how >>>>>> this is progress >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Are to too stupid to see that it only remains unsolvable >>>>> because it has been stupidly incorrect the whole time? >>>> >>>> ur not making it solvable by declaring the input invalid, >>>> >>>> that still leaves the problem unsolved as we obviously don't get a >>>> decision on whether DD halts or not. >>>> >>> >>> Is is an "unsolved problem" in the same way that no one >>> will ever figure out the correct numeric square root of >>> a dead chicken. In other words it was never ever an >>> "unsolved problem". It was ALWAYS only a stupid mistake. >>> >> >> so? that still leaves it as an _unsolvable_ problem... > So you don't understand what the word NEVER means? the halting problem was literally never viewed as a "unsolved problem" within computing, in the first place! literally the first paper /on computable numbers/ ever written classified the halting problem as unsolvable... just like u seem to think now i have no idea wtf ur going on about polcott 🤷🤷🤷 at this time, i'm finding your posting detrimental to my work. instead of reinforcing the consensus position of the halting problem being unsolvable... i've been instead trying to find a way to make the halting problem _more solvable_ in some way, shape, or form. ultimately something to prove that we _ought_ to be _only_ deploying code with _computed semantic proofs_ for all the behavior we expect them to have... idk if this means: - some kind of logical trick that makes such a unsolvable computation fundamentally inexpressible - OR some kind of proof the demonstrates those unsolvable computations and redundant, uninteresting, or not useful to us - OR some kind of contradiction formed by allowing those unsolvable computations to exist - OR something else i'm forgetting at the moment - OR some combination of the above i've kinda stalled at the moment due to having a kid a few weeks ago, and worse lack of cooperative discussion partners > >> >> in what _meaningful_ way does this further our ability? >> > -- arising us out of the computing dark ages, please excuse my pseudo-pyscript, ~ the lil crank that could
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 14:06 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 16:19 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 14:46 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 16:53 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 16:13 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 18:20 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 16:27 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 18:36 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 17:51 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 20:23 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 20:13 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 22:56 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 01:21 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 07:45 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 12:09 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 14:49 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 15:10 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 13:27 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 15:52 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 20:12 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 23:00 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 21:23 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-03 08:59 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-04 09:21 +0300
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-04 10:29 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-05 11:50 +0300
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-05 11:11 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-06 11:09 +0300
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-06 08:54 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-07 10:09 +0300
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-07 09:13 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-08 10:27 +0300
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-14 02:14 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 19:07 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 20:14 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 20:16 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-01 20:21 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-06-11 22:17 +0100
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-06-11 17:19 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-06-12 15:28 +0100
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 11:03 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 20:57 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 07:32 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 11:59 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 12:08 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 14:48 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-05-02 13:20 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 20:50 -0700
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2026-05-02 15:50 +0000
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 11:02 -0500
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-06-11 22:12 +0100
Re: polcott wtf are you even arguing??? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-06-11 17:17 -0500
csiph-web