Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.ai.philosophy    |    Perhaps we should ask SkyNet about this    |    59,235 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 58,141 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to dbush    |
|    Re: This only has one correct meaning an    |
|    23 Oct 25 13:55:47    |
      [continued from previous message]              >>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 11:51 PM, olcott wrote:       >>>>>>>>> > On 10/20/2025 10:45 PM, dbush wrote:       >>>>>>>>> >> And it is a semantic tautology that a finite string       >>>>>>>>> description of a       >>>>>>>>> >> Turing machine is stipulated to specify all semantic       >>>>>>>>> properties of the       >>>>>>>>> >> described machine, including whether it halts when executed       >>>>>>>>> directly.       >>>>>>>>> >       >>>>>>>>> > Yes that is all correct       >>>>>>>>>       >>>>>>>>> This means you agree that the finite string input to HHH(DD),       >>>>>>>>> which is the description of machine DD and therefore specifies       >>>>>>>>> all semantic properties of that machine, specifies halting       >>>>>>>>> behavior.       >>>>>>>>>       >>>>>>>>>       >>>>>>>> That is a perfectly correct statement of the       >>>>>>>> halting problems false assumption       >>>>>>>       >>>>>>> So you agree that the input to HHH(DD) specifies halting behavior       >>>>>>       >>>>>> *No stupid exactly the opposite of that*       >>>>>>       >>>>>> The behavior of DD simulated by HHH according to       >>>>>> the semantics of its specification language C, x86,       >>>>>> Turing Machine description, is the ultimate judge       >>>>>> of the behavior       >>>>>>       >>>>>> *that the input* (not any damn thing else)       >>>>>> *that the input* (not any damn thing else)       >>>>>> *that the input* (not any damn thing else)       >>>>>> *that the input* (not any damn thing else)       >>>>>> *that the input* (not any damn thing else)       >>>>>> Specifies.       >       > The above point       >       >>>>>       >>>>> And because HHH aborts, DD is *NOT* simulated by HHH according to       >>>>> the semantics of its specification language.       >>>>>       >>>>> Therefore there is no basis to judge the behavior.       >       > Was refuted above       >       >>>> |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca