Re: Olcott is a Liar

On 7/6/24 11:36 PM, olcott wrote:

On 7/6/2024 10:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/6/24 10:44 PM, olcott wrote:

On 7/6/2024 9:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/6/24 10:17 PM, olcott wrote:

On 7/6/2024 7:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/6/24 7:54 PM, olcott wrote:

>
(a) You determine that you need groceries
(b) You report this need
(c) then you go to the store to buy them
>
(a) HHH determines that it needs to abort DDD
(b) HHH reports this this need (as text before the action)
(c) then HHH aborts DDD
>

>
And I, being willful, am not FORCED to do that sequence.

>
*Sure you are. This cannot work*
 >> (c) then you go to the store to buy them
 >> (b) You report this need
 >> (a) You determine that you need groceries
>
>

>
Sure I can, I can decide to go to the store just because I feel like it.
>

>
When there is a mandatory sequence you cannot avoid it.
Trying to lie about this proves that you are a liar.
>

>
What What made them mandatory?

 Reality makes them mandatory.

No it doesnnt.

I need to find a better example that is airtight.

You need to stop lying and thinking your made up examples are real.
And since the actual topic is the determinism of the program, irrelevant. (But you dare not admit that or you have to face your ignorance)

 Can you write a computer program on your computer
while it is powered off before turning it on?

With paper and pencil using the laptop as a writing base.
I only need the computer to maybe compile the code to machine code (unless it is simple enough to do that mayself) and to run the final executable.
As soon as I put the program to the paper, its behavior has been determined, which is why I CAN write the program on paper.

 

>
You REALLY don't know how people or computers work do you.
>
I am sorry you are so stupid, but it seems you did this to yourself.
>
>

 It seems that I have a higher IQ than you.
I think that you admitted that. My memory
may be incorrect.