Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:No, YOU ARE.Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:That everyone that understands these thingsOn 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:Why repeating this bug in HHH?On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:>
>So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that myself and Peter>
Olcott have to fight against.
Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against dishonesty.
If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, too, and
nothing would be left.
>
_DDD()
[00002192] 55 push ebp
[00002193] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00002195] 6892210000 push 00002192
[0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 // call HHH
[0000219f] 83c404 add esp,+04
[000021a2] 5d pop ebp
[000021a3] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
>
Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according
to the rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach
its own "ret" instruction final halt state.
sees that there is no bug makes your statement
the kind of reckless disregard for the truth
that loses defamation cases.
In other words by objective standards: YOU ARE A LIAR
NO it isn't.We know that HHH is unable to reach the reachable 'ret' instruction.It is also a verified fact that HHH does simulate
We also know that it not possible to repair HHH. It is impossible for HHH to simulate itself.
itself simulating DDD thus again you are proven
to be a liar.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.