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


Groups > comp.theory > #106098

Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD

From Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups comp.theory, sci.logic
Subject Re: DD correctly simulated by HH cannot possible halt --- Try to prove otherwise --- x86 DD
Date 2024-06-02 22:24 -0400
Organization i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID <v3j9h3$2qu72$18@i2pn2.org> (permalink)
References (28 earlier) <v3iqae$3hetk$1@dont-email.me> <v3ir73$2qu71$9@i2pn2.org> <v3isk0$3hvf6$1@dont-email.me> <v3j06k$2qu72$16@i2pn2.org> <v3j76v$3j83v$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 6/2/24 9:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/2/2024 6:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/2/24 6:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/2/2024 5:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/2/24 6:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/2/2024 4:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/2/24 5:25 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/2/2024 3:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/2/24 4:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> *We can see that the following DD cannot possibly halt*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unless the HH(DD,DD) aborts its simulation and returns 0, then 
>>>>>>>> DD(DD) will ALWAYS halt when directly called, which is the 
>>>>>>>> definition of "Halting".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not your LIE that it pertains to partial simulations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *when correctly simulated by every HH that can possibly exist*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Except for EVERY HH that aborts its simulation and returns 0
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This may be an ADD thing.
>>>>>>> For every HH that aborts its simulation and returns 0
>>>>>>> DD correctly simulated by this HH *DID NOT HALT AND NEVER WILL HALT*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Except you mental problems are getting in YOUR way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You said that "DD Can not halt" NOT "the simulation by H of DD can 
>>>>>> not Halt"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *I said neither of those things so it may be an ADD problem*
>>>>
>>>> I guess your medication is making you blind.
>>>>
>>>> Read the top line quoted from you on 6/2/24 4:50 PM
>>>>
>>>> You said:
>>>>     "*We can see that the following DD cannot possibly halt*"
>>>>
>>>
>>> *Deceitfully taking things out of context*
>>>
>>> On 6/2/2024 3:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>  > *We can see that the following DD cannot possibly halt*
>>>  > *when correctly simulated by every HH that can possibly exist*
>>
>> But the second line doesn't change the meaning of the first line, as 
>> Halting ALWAYS (unless clearly modified) refers to the behavior of the 
>> machine.
>>
> 
> I was wrong to call you deceitful on this, I sincerely apologize.
> The above two lines are the same single sentence that I wanted
> to make bold. Putting a period at the end or not breaking it up
> into two lines makes bold not work.
> 
>> It just qualifies which DD we might be talking about.
>>
>> Just like the sentence:
>>
> 
> My whole point has ALWAYS been DD correctly simulated by HH.

Which means NOTHING, as your definition of "correctly Simulated" doesn't 
meet the requirements to talk about the behavior of the machine 
described by the input.

You don't seem to understand that you can't just "redefine" the system 
to meet your desires.

That is why all you are actually talking about is POOP.

> DD specifies non-halting behavior to the simulator/UTM aspect
> of DD. DD(DD) has different behavior that decider HH is not
> actually held accountable for. HH is ONLY held accountable
> for the behavior that DD specifies to its simulator/UTM aspect.

Then it just isn't a Halt Decider. PERIOD, and your whole arguement 
fails, and is based on just lying.

As I have pointed out, by your definitions, a triial decider can just 
declare that virtual all input are non-halting and be "just as correct", 
since the logic you try to use is just invalid.

> 
>> We can see that the house was red when the ball went through the window.
>>
>> The ball going through the window doesn't affect the color attribute 
>> of the house. It might qualify the WHEN (but Halting of a machine 
>> isn't dependent on time) or which house we are talking about (so it 
>> clearly makes it a DD that it paired to an HH), but it doesn't affect 
>> the color.
>>
>> Just like the fact that you have given the description of this DD to 
>> HH, doesn't affect the behavior of that instance of DD, it only might 
>> indicate that it HAS been paired with such an HH and not some other 
>> thing.
>>
>>>
>>>> Remember, Halting is defined as the MACHINE reaching a fianl state, 
>>>> so trying to qualify it with a partial simulation is an irrelevent 
>>>> qualification.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Those are DIFFERENT statements.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DD WILL Halt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your claim, that I will neither confirm or deny (until you can 
>>>>>> show why I should), is that the simulation by H can never reach 
>>>>>> the statement after the call instruction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Still not quite what I said*
>>>>
>>>> But you did in your message from 3:54 today earier in the thread:
>>>>
>>>>    DD correctly emulated by HH with an x86 emulator cannot possibly
>>>>    reach past its own machine instruction [00001c2e]
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you get my words 99.99999% perfectly then you screwed up
>>> far too much, thus 80% is not in the ballpark.
>>
>> So, if you ever slightm
>>
>>>
>>> *We can see that the following DD cannot possibly halt*
>>> *when correctly simulated by every HH that can possibly exist*
>>
>> Nope ABSOLUTE LIE.
>>
> 
> *If it was even incorrect then you could show a counter-example*
> 

D(D) is the counter example.

D(D) Halts if H(D,D) returns 0.

The fact you want the question to be different doesn't make it different.

Remember, adding the condition of "When Correctly simulated by evdry HH 
that can possible exist" doesn't change the meaning of the first line to 
refer to the actual machine, which is what the term Halting will refer 
to. It just might qualify what DD we are talking about

You might be able to make the claim that no simulation of DD can 
possible reach a final state of the simulated DD ...

I won't verify that to be correct, but that seems to be the statement 
you want to make, but then it doesn't make it sound like you are solving 
the halting problem.


> That it is categorically impossible to show a counter-example
> conclusively proves that it is correct. I really hope that you are
> merely confused about this. I really hope you are not risking your
> salvation.

But the fact the counter example HAS been shown just shows you to be a liar.

> 
>> Hlating is a property of the MACHINE  /  PROGRAM, not the simulation.
>>
>> DD(DD) WILL HALT as long as HH(DD,DD) returns 0, and any HH(DD,DD) 
>> that doesn't return 0 fails to meet your requirement that HH be a 
>> decider, so we can automatically filter those out.
>>
> 
> My whole point has ALWAYS been DD correctly simulated by HH.
> DD specifies non-halting behavior to the simulator/UTM aspect
> of DD. DD(DD) has different behavior that decider HH is not
> actually held accountable for. HH is ONLY held accountable
> for the behavior that DD specifies to its simulator/UTM aspect.

But that just points out that you are just being deceptive.

Halting is ALWAYS about the actual behavior of the machine.

And, your HH is NOT a UTM if it aborts its simulatin, no matter how much 
you want to try to claim it to be, as if FUNDAMENTALLY breaks the 
definition.

It is like taking an electric car, and remove the electric motors and 
replace with a gas engine, and then trying to say you still have an 
electric car, because that is what you started with until you "enhanced it".

> 
>> You not understanding what your words mean is YOUR problem.
>>
>> And you are just proving that you have a reckless disregard for the 
>> truth, showing that you are just an ignorant pathologial liar.
>>
> 
> I really hope that you are  merely confused about this.
> I really hope you are not risking your salvation.

I know I am not, but your repeated deceptions make it clear you never 
had one.

> 
>> You MIGHT be able to claim that the SIMULATION of DD when correctly 
>> performed by HH can never reach a final state. That is the claim you 
>> seem to be working on, which i will neither confirm nor deny until we 
>> handle this issue.,
>>
> 
> *DD simulated by HH cannot possibly halt*
> Saying the opposite way makes it looks like HH is not a good
> enough simulator. HH is a perfectly correct simulator of its N
> steps of correct simulation. After N steps of correct simulation
> HH correctly recognizes that DD cannot possibly halt no matter
> how many steps are simulated.

But as I have said, DD does halt.

And the problem is that HH ISN'T a good enough simulator to be able to 
use its result to decide halting, because partial simulation never prove 
non-halting behavior.

The problem is you forget that HH is what HH is, and thus it can't argue 
that ir it was something different than what it actually is, and in a 
why that changes the contents of the input give to it (which includes 
the HH that DD calls) without invoking invalid logic.

SO, since HH DOES abort its simulation, its logi must be consistant with 
that behavior, and not think about the non-existant case where the input 
is based on a different machine.

That just proves your ignorance and deceptive nature.

> 
>> Your statement about HALTING is just incorrect.
>>
> 
> Not at all. It has always been correct and you have denied the
> verified facts. If this is through confusion then there is no
> risk to your salvation. I really hope it is because of confusion.
> I don't want you to lose your salvation.

Nope. You just don't understand what you are talking about,

Your facts are NOT verified, but are just your own fabrications.

The problem is you seem to have

> 
>> Try to PROVE your statement
>>
>> Quote ACTULAL Definitions and accepted scholarly publish works in the 
>> field.
>>
>> So far, it is just "Olcott says" and Olcott has been proven to LIE and 
>> is often mistaken, so not a reliable source.
>>
> 
> For the last few months I HAVE ONLY BEEN TALKING ABOUT
> SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AND YOU HAVE CONSISTENTLY DENIED
> THE VERIFIED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING FACTS.

But your "facts" are not Software Engineering facts.

Can you actually quote a SOURCE for your claims?

SOmething accepted by the general community?

I don't think you actually know what that is, and you think that 
anything you think up and seems right to you is a "verified fact"

That just shows how much of a pathological liar you are.

 From what I have seen, you are little more than a hack programmer who 
doesn't understand the basic princples of Software Engineering.

> 
> There is no HH that can possibly exist such that DD correctly
> simulated by HH can possibly reach past its own line 03.

That might be true, and I will refuse to confirm or deny that fact, 
because it is meaningless.

The error comes when you rephrase that to say that DD doesn't Halt. and 
THAT is just a blantant lie.

> 
>>>
>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>> 00       int HH(ptr p, ptr i);
>>> 01       int DD(ptr p)
>>> 02       {
>>> 03         int Halt_Status = HH(p, p);
>>> 04         if (Halt_Status)
>>> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
>>> 06         return Halt_Status;
>>> 07       }
>>>
>>> _DD()
>>> [00001c22] 55         push ebp
>>> [00001c23] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>> [00001c25] 51         push ecx
>>> [00001c26] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> [00001c29] 50         push eax        ; push DD 1c22
>>> [00001c2a] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> [00001c2d] 51         push ecx        ; push DD 1c22
>>> [00001c2e] e80ff7ffff call 00001342   ; call HH
>>> [00001c33] 83c408     add esp,+08
>>> [00001c36] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax
>>> [00001c39] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
>>> [00001c3d] 7402       jz 00001c41
>>> [00001c3f] ebfe       jmp 00001c3f
>>> [00001c41] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04]
>>> [00001c44] 8be5       mov esp,ebp
>>> [00001c46] 5d         pop ebp
>>> [00001c47] c3         ret
>>> Size in bytes:(0038) [00001c47]
>>>
>>
> 

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