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

On 7/6/24 12:28 PM, olcott wrote:

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.

No, the call actually correctly simulated WILL Return, as a actually correct simulation won't stop until it reaches the end.
Yes, the PARTIAL simulation by HHH won't reach that state, but since you have defined that it WILL abort its simulation and return, that makes the FULL simulation of the input reach that point and see the returns.

 If you fail to sufficiently understand the semantics of the
x86 language then seeing this is impossible for you.

Which, BY DEFINITION, say a CORRECT simulaition of the input doesn't stop just because the simulator wants to (or needs to for some reason). A simulator that stops its simulation isn't "correct" but only "partial" (assumed to correctly do every step except for the fact tht the last instruction simulated isn't followed by the next one after it).

 _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]