On 11/11/2025 1:17 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-11, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:09 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-11, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 9:55 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-10, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 5:09 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-10, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
That is not the behavior that the input to H(D) specifies.
Insane nonsense.
The input to H is one single D which specifies one single behavior. >>>>>>>>
simulator.exe simulates Test.c. This simulates D that
calls H(D) that the simulator recognizes as itself.
"recognizing self" is an undecidable problem.
simulator.exe is
... a figment of your imagination, and has whatever
properties you need it to have to suit whatever narrative
you are spinning at the moment.
On 11/3/2025 10:28 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
The interpreter API consists of primitives built
into the system, so it isn't traced.
The internals of these primitives can be imagined
without being directly specified.
In my interpreter walkthrough I more or less specified /what/ the
interfaces do with the example. It is very clear how the simulation
object tracks the control flows and steps into statements; it is
plausible due to these details; no step requires "magical thinking"
or the solution to incomputable problems.
You are not specifying anything concrete, neither by a body of
requirements, nor by concrete example.
typedef int (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
int main()
{
HHH(DD);
}
I will just go back to my original code
if you want to play head games.
It has been shown with actual programming against your code framework
that abortind deciders leave behind continuable simulations, which may
terminate.
Only if you don't resume them at the
exact same state where you left them
and that is flat our cheating.
Mike Terry has evidently taken the code and perfected it; he removed all
your invalid hacks from the "H" and "D" resulting in pure functions.
With that he actually obtained evidence of an infinite simulation
tower starting up in which the individual D's terminate.
Yet that is clearly cheating.
Whether or not it is possible for HHH to determine
that its input DOES NOT HALT any sufficiently competent
C programmer (that is not a damned liar) can easily
see this.
The non-halting behavior axiom is only differs from
infinite recursion in that it is recursive simulation
and not recursive invocation.
I honestly cannot believe that anyone denying
that the input to HHH(DD) does not halt as
anything but a damned liar. Not any ordinary
liar, a liar that is literally condemned to
actual Hell (if such a place exists).
You've done a number of things wrong in the Halt7 test cases:
- conflating instruction traces from multiple independent simulations
into one stream, thus falsely identifying recursion where there is
none.
- using a "Root" flag to get a top-level HHH to behave differently
from the child HHH instances, so that it's two different functions.
You cannot be pulling such stunts if you're going to present
anything to serious academia.
Every HHH must have an e
The reason that I am so harsh about this is because
a system that can compute truth can end the killing
of the entire planet by very well paid hired liars.
My paper outlines many key details required to
accomplish this.
We are moving the USA to the brink of the rise of
the fourth Reich only because True(x) is not computable.
Trump is about 45% of the way to achieving Hitler's
own power only because we cannot effectively counter
his Nazi propaganda.
On 2025-11-12, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
The reason that I am so harsh about this is because
a system that can compute truth can end the killing
of the entire planet by very well paid hired liars.
On 2025-11-12, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
The reason that I am so harsh about this is because
a system that can compute truth can end the killing
of the entire planet by very well paid hired liars.
My paper outlines many key details required to
accomplish this.
As the crank turns ...
We are moving the USA to the brink of the rise of
the fourth Reich only because True(x) is not computable.
Get help, and make sure that includes med prescriptions.
Trump is about 45% of the way to achieving Hitler's
own power only because we cannot effectively counter
his Nazi propaganda.
You are more koo-koo than Toucan Sam is for Cocoa Puffs.
On 11/11/2025 8:13 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-12, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
The reason that I am so harsh about this is because
a system that can compute truth can end the killing
of the entire planet by very well paid hired liars.
My paper outlines many key details required to
accomplish this.
As the crank turns ...
We are moving the USA to the brink of the rise of
the fourth Reich only because True(x) is not computable.
Get help, and make sure that includes med prescriptions.
Trump is about 45% of the way to achieving Hitler's
own power only because we cannot effectively counter
his Nazi propaganda.
You are more koo-koo than Toucan Sam is for Cocoa Puffs.
The key tell the Trump is exactly copying Hitler
was his lies about election fraud perfectly
duplicated Chapter 6 of Hitler's Mein Kampf
CHAPTER VI. WAR PROPAGANDA
#LiesAboutElectionFraud
Never any evidence of election fraud
that could possibly change the results.
Trump is just copying Hitler's "big lie"
There are many more things since then.
For those that are sleepwalking toward totalitarianism
On 2025-11-12, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
For those that are sleepwalking toward totalitarianism
... says the gullible twit who thinks LLMs are sentient.
On 11/11/2025 11:52 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-12, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
For those that are sleepwalking toward totalitarianism
... says the gullible twit who thinks LLMs are sentient.
Alternatively stupid people that understand nothing
yet have catch phrases that convince fools.
On 2025-11-12, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/11/2025 11:52 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-12, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
For those that are sleepwalking toward totalitarianism
... says the gullible twit who thinks LLMs are sentient.
Alternatively stupid people that understand nothing
yet have catch phrases that convince fools.
The only difference between you and someone who repeats
catch phrases is that your repeated shit isn't catchy.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,089 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 155:07:52 |
| Calls: | 13,921 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 187,021 |
| D/L today: |
3,909 files (988M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,457,191 |