Re: Copyright for "simulating halt decider" by Olcott for many years --- proves itself correct

On 3/2/2025 6:19 PM, Andy Walker wrote:

On 02/03/2025 21:11, olcott wrote:

On 3/2/2025 2:40 PM, Andy Walker wrote:

   http://www.cuboid.me.uk/anw/G12FCO/lect18.html
[start at the third paragraph], [...]

[the third paragraph]

      [Note that I said "start at ...", not "look only at ...".]
 

_DD()
[00002133] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping

[...]
      Not interested;  sorry.  I was concerned only to point out that
the idea of a "simulating halt decider", or any similar phrase, was not
new in 2004, but has been well-known for many [at least 60] years.  If
you choose to waste your remaining time on this planet trying to do the
impossible, go ahead.  I shan't be joining you, so this will be my last
contribution to the debate unless something interesting crops up.  "DD"
and "HHH" and similar aren't in the least bit interesting to me;  I'm
astonished that others are so fascinated, but that's up to them.
 

Lots of people rejected the idea of simulation as an
option so you made no actually relevant point at all.
int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
The new thing that I discovered is that DD emulated
by HHH cannot possibly reach the self-contradictory
portion thus cannot possibly thwart a correct termination
status decision.
It has always been stupid to claim that the relevant
behavior is the directly executed DD that has no pathological
relationship to its emulator that changes its behavior.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer