Re: Ben Bacarisse fails understand that deciders COMPUTE THE MAPPING FROM INPUTS

On 8/29/2024 2:54 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-08-28 15:49:20 +0000, immibis said:
 

On 28/08/24 09:37, Mikko wrote:

This group is for discussions about the theory of computation and related
topics. Discussion about people is off-topic.

>
there is no moderation, so people are even free to post about cheap viagra if they want.

 Administrators or servers may prevent those that post too musch spam.
Other than that, nobody prevents off-topic posts. We may point out to
posters or adimistrators that if a message is off-topic or harmful to
dicsussion. Adminstrotors hardly care unless there are too many such
posts.
 

When some specific person makes a key mistake that results
in the incorrect denigration of my life's work I correct this
specific person's specific mistake.
That Ben did not understand how deciders compute the mapping
from input finite strings to the behaviors that they specify
was his only mistake. No one else got this close to correct.
*Context for Ben's agreement*
On 10/14/2022 11:36 AM, olcott wrote:
 >
 > int Sipser_D(ptr2 M)
 > {
 >    if ( Sipser_H(M, M) )
 >      return 0;
 >    return 1;
 > }
 >
 > int main()
 > {
 >    Output((char*)"Input_Halts = ", Sipser_D(Sipser_D));
 > }
 >
On 10/14/2022 7:44 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
 > I don't think that is the shell game.  PO really /has/ an H
 > (it's trivial to do for this one case) that correctly determines
 > that P(P) *would* never stop running *unless* aborted.
...
 > But H determines (correctly) that D would not halt if it
 > were not halted.  That much is a truism.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer