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 58,979 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to Oleksiy Gapotchenko    |
|    Re: Proof that the halting problem itsel    |
|    05 Jan 26 18:39:52    |
      XPost: comp.theory, comp.software-eng       From: polcott333@gmail.com              On 1/5/2026 6:24 PM, Oleksiy Gapotchenko wrote:       > Just an external observation:       >       > A lot of tech innovations in software optimization area get discarded       > from the very beginning because people who work on them perceive the       > halting problem as a dogma. As result, certain practical things (in code       > analysis) are not even tried because it's assumed that they are bound by       > the halting problem.       >       > In practice, however, the halting problem is rarely a limitation. And       > even when one hits it, they can safely discard a particular analysis       > branch by marking it as inconclusive.       >       > Halting problem for sure can be better framed to not sound as a dogma,       > at least. In practice, algorithmic inconclusiveness has 0.001       > probability, not a 100% guarantee as many engineers perceive it.       >              The true issue with the misconception of undecidability       is that it prevents       "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"       from being reliable computable for the body of knowledge.              > On 12/11/2025 12:03 AM, polcott wrote:       >> On 12/10/2025 4:58 PM, wij wrote:       >>> On Wed, 2025-12-10 at 16:43 -0600, polcott wrote:       >>>> When the halting problem requires a halt decider       >>>> to report on the behavior of a Turing machine       >>>> this is always a category error.       >>>>       >>>> The corrected halting problem requires a Turing       >>>> machine decider to report in the behavior that       >>>> its finite string input specifies.       >>>       >>> If you honestly admit you are solving POO Problem, everything is fine.       >>>       >>       >> *It has take me 21 years to boil it down to this*       >>       >> When the halting problem requires a halt decider       >> to report on the behavior of a Turing machine this       >> is always a category error.       >>       >> The corrected halting problem requires a Turing       >> machine decider to report in the behavior that       >> its finite string input specifies.       >>       >                     --       Copyright 2026 Olcott |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca