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

Groups > comp.theory > #134941

Re: Addressing duffer-speak

From wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.theory
Subject Re: Addressing duffer-speak
Date 2025-11-04 03:34 +0800
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <675f351f8af25f39f38cb7f0f9e75e34a9be6260.camel@gmail.com> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <10easc9$32v88$1@dont-email.me> <be5bdd2e97c623a13047152f598ba31928c855ce.camel@gmail.com> <10eav33$33oj4$1@dont-email.me> <2ae9a5c34a3061faf98514f6448e2c84bd7c515e.camel@gmail.com> <10eavmd$33vmh$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 13:27 -0600, olcott wrote:
> On 11/3/2025 1:23 PM, wij wrote:
> > On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 13:16 -0600, olcott wrote:
> > > On 11/3/2025 1:09 PM, wij wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 12:30 -0600, olcott wrote:
> > > > > On 11/3/2025 12:13 PM, wij wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 12:00 -0600, olcott wrote:
> > > > > > > On 11/3/2025 11:33 AM, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 11:18 -0600, olcott wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 11/3/2025 8:19 AM, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 07:47 -0600, olcott wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 11/1/2025 9:12 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 02/11/2025 01:46, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Once Olcott has plonked everyone I guess the shitshow here will finally
> > > > > > > > > > > > > stop?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > /Flibble
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > PO will still post new threads, but the average thread size will shrink
> > > > > > > > > > > > to about 6 posts.
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > PO will only see his own posts, so there will be no incentive for him to
> > > > > > > > > > > > "evolve" his duffer-speak in response to objections.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > int D()
> > > > > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > > > >         int Halt_Status = H(D);
> > > > > > > > > > >         if (Halt_Status)
> > > > > > > > > > >           HERE: goto HERE;
> > > > > > > > > > >         return Halt_Status;
> > > > > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > The function H is a simulating termination analyzer:
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > (a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern:
> > > > > > > > > > >           abort simulation and return 0.
> > > > > > > > > > > (b) Simulated input reaches its simulated
> > > > > > > > > > >           "return" statement: return 1.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > when given a function P, it literally simulates
> > > > > > > > > > > each step of executing P() to see whether that
> > > > > > > > > > > simulated execution ever reaches a return statement.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Now let H simulate D. Based only on the outcome of
> > > > > > > > > > > that literal simulation (not on reasoning about what
> > > > > > > > > > > should happen), what result should H(D) produce?
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > H(D) can never return.
> > > > > > > > > > This condition is described as 'undecidable' as HP proof has shown.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > You simply ignored (a).
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > You ignored the fact that HP asks for a real halt decider, not 'words'.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > You ignored the fact that I am only talking about
> > > > > > > the actual steps of D actually simulated by H and
> > > > > > > not one damn thing else in the universe.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Your D says:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Nothing matters besides the actual execution trace
> > > > > of D simulated by H.
> > > > 
> > > > Repeat. you seemingly like to erase what you don't understand.
> > > > Your D says:
> > > > 
> > > >     If H(D) returns non-zero
> > > That is the guess what D does mode,
> > > not the actually trace what D actually
> > > simulated by H actually does mode.
> > > 
> > 
> > So, the actual code is not what you shown? Why you post a false report?
> > 
> > 
> 
> This might just be beyond your intellectual capacity.
> Claude AI, ChatGPT 5.0, Grok and Gemini could all pay
> 100% complete attention to every single detail.
> 
> That may simply be too much for you.
> 
> int D()
> {
>    int Halt_Status = H(D);
>    if (Halt_Status)
>      HERE: goto HERE;
>    return Halt_Status;
> }

You seems not to understand what your D says. Your D says:
  If H(D) returns non-zero (e.g. 1), D() will never return,
  else (i.e. 0), D() will return.

It does not matter what H is (as whatever you say). The H inside D
cannot be a correct halt decider.

> The function H is a simulating termination analyzer:
> (a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern: abort simulation and 
> return 0.
> (b) Simulated input reaches its simulated "return" statement: return 1.
> 
> When given a function P, it literally simulates each step of executing 
> P() to see whether that simulated execution ever reaches a return 
> statement. Now let H simulate D. Based only on the outcome of that 
> literal simulation (not on reasoning about what should happen), what 
> result should H(D) produce?
>

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

Thread

Plonkers Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-11-02 01:46 +0000
  Re: Plonkers Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-02 02:12 +0000
    "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-01 21:41 -0500
      Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-02 04:08 +0000
        Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-01 23:14 -0500
          Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 00:32 -0400
            Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-02 07:34 +0000
          Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-11-02 04:39 +0000
          Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 14:10 -0500
            Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 14:26 -0600
              Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 22:58 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 22:27 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-02 23:35 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 22:57 -0600
        Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 18:25 -0600
          Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 19:32 -0500
            Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 18:35 -0600
              Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 20:04 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 19:17 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 20:26 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 20:25 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 21:33 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 20:53 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 22:11 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 21:16 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 22:27 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-11-03 03:49 +0000
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 22:24 -0600
            Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-11-03 01:00 +0000
              Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 20:06 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-11-03 02:35 +0000
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 20:54 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 21:13 -0600
              Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 19:07 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 20:08 -0500
      Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-02 07:15 +0000
        Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 07:16 -0600
          Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 21:46 +0800
            Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 07:54 -0600
              Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 22:12 +0800
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 23:23 +0800
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 14:29 -0600
          Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 08:48 -0500
            Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 07:57 -0600
              Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 09:00 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 08:09 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 09:13 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 09:12 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 12:18 -0500
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 14:31 -0600
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 16:42 -0500
              Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-02 14:19 +0000
                Re: "duffer speak" ??? Mike can't be dishonest so what is left ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-02 08:42 -0600
    Re: Plonkers Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-02 07:10 +0000
    Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 07:47 -0600
      Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 22:19 +0800
        Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 10:32 -0600
          Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 00:42 +0800
        Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 11:18 -0600
          Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 01:33 +0800
            Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 12:00 -0600
              Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 02:13 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 12:30 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 03:09 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 13:16 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 03:23 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 13:27 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 03:34 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 13:37 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 03:52 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 13:57 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 04:01 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 14:31 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 05:22 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 15:32 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-11-03 22:38 +0000
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 15:25 -0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 19:40 +0800
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak --- head games olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 06:31 -0600
                Re: Addressing duffer-speak --- head games dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 07:53 -0500

csiph-web