Re: Liar detector: Fred, Richard, Joes and Alan --- Ben's agreement

On 7/6/2024 10:26 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 06 Jul 2024 10:10:06 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/6/2024 10:00 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 06.jul.2024 om 15:01 schreef olcott:

On 7/6/2024 4:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 05.jul.2024 om 17:54 schreef olcott:

On 7/5/2024 10:48 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 05.jul.2024 om 16:05 schreef olcott:

On 7/5/2024 8:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

>
HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself.

 

Your replies are only irrelevant, or supporting my reasoning. I
showed that HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly and your
full trace supports this, as it shows that the simulating HHH is
unable to reach the 'ret' of the simulated HHH.
>

Unable to reach ret *is a freaking demonstration* of an incorrect
simulation.
>

If it was incorrect you would have to show which x86 instruction was
simulated incorrectly. You can't do that because it is a matter of
verified fact that none of them were simulated incorrectly.

You have previously agreed that the direct execution halts. How can
a simulation deviate and be correct?
 

If you sufficiently understand the semantics of the x86
language then you can see that the call to HHH(DDD) from
DDD simulated according to the semantics of the x86 language
cannot possibly return.
If you fail to sufficiently understand the semantics of the
x86 language then seeing this is impossible for you.
_DDD()
[00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d               pop ebp
[00002183] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer