Re: Flibble’s Leap: Why Behavioral Divergence Implies a Type Distinction in the Halting Problem

On 11/05/2025 16:34, Mr Flibble wrote:

On Sun, 11 May 2025 16:25:14 +0100, Richard Heathfield wrote:
 

For a question to be semantically incorrect, it takes more than just you
and your allies to be unhappy with it.

 For a question to be semantically correct, it takes more than just you and
your allies to be happy with it.

Indeed. It has to have meaning. It does. That meaning has to be understood by sufficiently intelligent people. It is.
You don't like the question. I get that. I don't know /why/ you don't like it, because all your explanations to date have been complete expletive deleted. For a Usenet article to be semantically correct, it helps if your readers can understand what the <exp. del.> you're talking about.
What I get from your stand is that you agree with olcott that a 'pathological' input halts... no, never halts... well, you can't decide between you, but you're agreed that it's definitely decidable, right?
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within