XPost: comp.theory   
   From: chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/27/2025 7:58 PM, olcott wrote:   
   > On 10/27/2025 7:37 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >> On 2025-10-27, Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> wrote:   
   >>> On 2025-10-27, dbush  wrote:   
   >>>> On 10/27/2025 4:48 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2025-10-27, dbush  wrote:   
   >>>>>>> I am only referring to these fifteen lines   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> A straight forward sequence of steps that any   
   >>>>>>> C programmer can easily determine:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> int D()   
   >>>>>>> {   
   >>>>>>>      int Halt_Status = H(D);   
   >>>>>>>      if (Halt_Status)   
   >>>>>>>        HERE: goto HERE;   
   >>>>>>>      return Halt_Status;   
   >>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Then you have nothing as this is incomplete and cannot be run.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> When I posted the git repo several days ago, Olcott immediately   
   >>>>> called me dishonest and replied with the above nonsense.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> He has been repeating it ever since.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Basically a meltdown, of sorts.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Oh yeah, he's thrashing.  He knows he's been beat and doesn't dare look   
   >>>> at your code, lest he has to admit he wasted the last 21 years.   
   >>>   
   >>> But I explained that the code can help you validate that your cheats are   
   >>> working. If you want to say that DDD simulated by HHH does not halt, and   
   >>> not be lying, you can now test that actual claim. If the simulated DDD   
   >>> halts, and you would like it not to, you have something to iterate   
   >>> against to get that fixed.   
   >>>   
   >>> Every engineer would be happy to have an easy, ready-made way to test   
   >>> the property of their system that they want to believe to be true.   
   >>>   
   >>> Instead of thank you, we get a childish tantrum.   
   >>   
   >> Unfortunately, it is not that rosy. The problem is that Olcott has not   
   >> only been claiming that various D's do not terminate when simulated   
   >> by various H's. He's been claiming that the D's do not terminate because   
   >> they never reach the "do the opposite" logic at all.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Such an easily verified fact that I cannot begin   
   > to imagine how anyone disputing this is not simply   
   > a dammed liar.   
   >   
   > *D simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own first line*   
   >   
   > int D()   
   > {   
   >    int Halt_Status = H(D);   
   >    if (Halt_Status)   
   >      HERE: goto HERE;   
   >    return Halt_Status;   
   > }   
   >   
   > H simulates D   
   > that calls H(D) to simulate D   
   > that calls H(D) to simulate D   
   > that calls H(D) to simulate D   
   > that calls H(D) to simulate D   
   > that calls H(D) to simulate D   
   > until H sees this repeating pattern.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   Tel me what HHH(DD) should return? Yawn...   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)