Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D)

On 6/20/2024 11:16 AM, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 20 Jun 2024 10:04:35 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/20/2024 9:42 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-20 05:15:37 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/20/2024 12:04 AM, Mikko wrote:

>

Still unclear whether you know what "termination analyzer" means.

>

I really don't care what you believe.
It is not about belief.
It is about correct reasoning.

>
No, it is not. It is about language maintenance. If you cannot present
your reasoning in Common Language it does not matter whether your
reasoning is correct.
>

I cannot possibly present my reasoning in a convincing way to people
that have already made up their mind and closed it thus fail to trace
through each step of this reasoning looking for an error and finding
none.

You cannot present wrong reasoning to people who know the literature.
We found many errors.
 

All the "errors" that have been pointed out are mere
dogmatic assertions that state that my conclusion is
inconsistent with the conclusions stated in textbooks.
The only other "errors" that were pointed out flatly
disagree with verified facts.
_DDD()
[00002093] 55               push ebp
[00002094] 8bec             mov ebp,esp
[00002096] 6893200000       push 00002093 ; push DDD
[0000209b] e853f4ffff       call 000014f3 ; call HH0
[000020a0] 83c404           add esp,+04
[000020a3] 5d               pop ebp
[000020a4] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [000020a4]
No DDD correctly emulated by any HH0 can possibly reach
past its own machine address [0000209b] according to the
actual semantics of the x86 language.
Every "rebuttal" of this was either a lie or a lack of
comprehension of the semantics of the x86 language.
Saying that I am wrong knowing that oneself does not
know the semantics of the x86 language is itself a lie.

If you simply leap to the false assumption that I am wrong yet fail to
point out any mistake because there are no mistakes this will only
convince gullible fools that also lack sufficient technical competence.

That "assumption" is pretty well founded if you believe CS. The mistakes
are still there even if you can't see them. There is only one gullible
fool here.
 

--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer