1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. COMP.THEORY

  • Atheism and morality

    From Mr Flibble@21:1/5 to olcott on Sun May 25 20:20:21 2025
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 14:40:38 -0500, olcott wrote:

    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 3:04 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 11:59 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    olcott <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:
    On 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that >>>>>>>>>>> myself and Peter Olcott have to fight against.

    Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against >>>>>>>>>> dishonesty.
    If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, too, >>>>>>>>>> and nothing would be left.


    _DDD()
    [00002192] 55             push ebp [00002193] 8bec           mov
    ebp,esp [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192 [0000219a] >>>>>>>>> e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH [0000219f]
    83c404         add esp,+04 [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
    [000021a3] c3             ret Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]

    Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according to the
    rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state.
    Why repeating this bug in HHH?

    That everyone that understands these things sees that there is no >>>>>>> bug ....

    That is untrue.  The bug is clear to anybody who understands C
    code.


    OK then to prove that you are not a damned liar (you won't do this
    because you know that you are a liar)
    show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the rules of the x86
    language

    Which doesn't happen as you have admitted on the record:


    You Are the epitome of bad faith and dishonesty.

    That I call you out on your lies and back it up with evidence is
    anything but.

    You must be an atheist or you would fear telling these lies.

    I am an atheist mate and atheists have morals, arguably better morals than
    you as we do not do good things just for reward or to avoid punishment.

    /Flibble

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From vallor@21:1/5 to olcott on Mon May 26 08:55:46 2025
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 15:43:17 -0500, olcott <[email protected]> wrote in <100vvd5$1i93o$[email protected]>:

    On 5/25/2025 3:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 14:40:38 -0500, olcott wrote:

    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 3:04 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 11:59 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    olcott <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:
    On 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that >>>>>>>>>>>>> myself and Peter Olcott have to fight against.

    Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against >>>>>>>>>>>> dishonesty.
    If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, >>>>>>>>>>>> too,
    and nothing would be left.


    _DDD()
    [00002192] 55             push ebp [00002193] 8bec          
    mov ebp,esp [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192 [0000219a] >>>>>>>>>>> e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH [0000219f] >>>>>>>>>>> 83c404         add esp,+04 [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
    [000021a3] c3             ret Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]

    Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according to the >>>>>>>>>>> rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state.
    Why repeating this bug in HHH?

    That everyone that understands these things sees that there is >>>>>>>>> no bug ....

    That is untrue.  The bug is clear to anybody who understands C >>>>>>>> code.


    OK then to prove that you are not a damned liar (you won't do this >>>>>>> because you know that you are a liar)
    show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the rules of the x86
    language

    Which doesn't happen as you have admitted on the record:


    You Are the epitome of bad faith and dishonesty.

    That I call you out on your lies and back it up with evidence is
    anything but.

    You must be an atheist or you would fear telling these lies.

    I am an atheist mate and atheists have morals, arguably better morals
    than you as we do not do good things just for reward or to avoid
    punishment.

    /Flibble

    Atheists can have good morals.
    Christians may be aware that the bible says:
    Revelations 21:8 all liars, shall have their part in the lake which
    burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    Damnation doctrine is spiritual terrorism, and certainly
    has no place being discussed in comp.theory.

    Have you considered the "common denominator" in these discussions,
    and contemplated the possibility that you might actually be mistaken?

    --
    -v

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fred. Zwarts@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 26 18:09:37 2025
    Op 26.mei.2025 om 17:11 schreef olcott:
    On 5/26/2025 3:55 AM, vallor wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 15:43:17 -0500, olcott <[email protected]>
    wrote in
    <100vvd5$1i93o$[email protected]>:

    On 5/25/2025 3:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 14:40:38 -0500, olcott wrote:

    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 3:04 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 11:59 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    olcott <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:
    On 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> myself and Peter Olcott have to fight against.

    Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dishonesty.
    If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> too,
    and nothing would be left.


    _DDD()
    [00002192] 55             push ebp [00002193] 8bec >>>>>>>>>>>>> mov ebp,esp [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192 [0000219a]
    e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH [0000219f] >>>>>>>>>>>>> 83c404         add esp,+04 [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
    [000021a3] c3             ret Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]

    Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according to the >>>>>>>>>>>>> rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state.
    Why repeating this bug in HHH?

    That everyone that understands these things sees that there is >>>>>>>>>>> no bug ....

    That is untrue.  The bug is clear to anybody who understands C >>>>>>>>>> code.


    OK then to prove that you are not a damned liar (you won't do this >>>>>>>>> because you know that you are a liar)
    show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the rules of the x86 >>>>>>>>> language

    Which doesn't happen as you have admitted on the record:


    You Are the epitome of bad faith and dishonesty.

    That I call you out on your lies and back it up with evidence is
    anything but.

    You must be an atheist or you would fear telling these lies.

    I am an atheist mate and atheists have morals, arguably better morals
    than you as we do not do good things just for reward or to avoid
    punishment.

    /Flibble

    Atheists can have good morals.
    Christians may be aware that the bible says:
    Revelations 21:8 all liars, shall have their part in the lake which
    burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    Damnation doctrine is spiritual terrorism, and certainly
    has no place being discussed in comp.theory.

    Have you considered the "common denominator" in these discussions,
    and contemplated the possibility that you might actually be mistaken?


    If I actually was mistaken then someone could
    point out the actual mistake. When I dare anyone
    to do that they change the subject.


    No, when your actual mistakes are pointed out, you ignore it and restart
    your baseless claims. It might be that you do not understand the
    mistakes pointed out to you, but closing your eyes for them do not make
    them disappear.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fred. Zwarts@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 26 20:37:56 2025
    Op 26.mei.2025 om 18:16 schreef olcott:
    On 5/26/2025 11:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 26.mei.2025 om 17:11 schreef olcott:
    On 5/26/2025 3:55 AM, vallor wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 15:43:17 -0500, olcott <[email protected]>
    wrote in
    <100vvd5$1i93o$[email protected]>:

    On 5/25/2025 3:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 14:40:38 -0500, olcott wrote:

    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 3:04 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 11:59 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    olcott <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:
    On 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> myself and Peter Olcott have to fight against.

    Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dishonesty.
    If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too,
    and nothing would be left.


    _DDD()
    [00002192] 55             push ebp [00002193] 8bec >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mov ebp,esp [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000219a]
    e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH [0000219f] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 83c404         add esp,+04 [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
    [000021a3] c3             ret Size in bytes:(0018) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [000021a3]

    Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its own >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "ret"
    instruction final halt state.
    Why repeating this bug in HHH?

    That everyone that understands these things sees that there is >>>>>>>>>>>>> no bug ....

    That is untrue.  The bug is clear to anybody who understands C >>>>>>>>>>>> code.


    OK then to prove that you are not a damned liar (you won't do >>>>>>>>>>> this
    because you know that you are a liar)
    show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the rules of the x86 >>>>>>>>>>> language

    Which doesn't happen as you have admitted on the record:


    You Are the epitome of bad faith and dishonesty.

    That I call you out on your lies and back it up with evidence is >>>>>>>> anything but.

    You must be an atheist or you would fear telling these lies.

    I am an atheist mate and atheists have morals, arguably better morals >>>>>> than you as we do not do good things just for reward or to avoid
    punishment.

    /Flibble

    Atheists can have good morals.
    Christians may be aware that the bible says:
    Revelations 21:8 all liars, shall have their part in the lake which
    burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    Damnation doctrine is spiritual terrorism, and certainly
    has no place being discussed in comp.theory.

    Have you considered the "common denominator" in these discussions,
    and contemplated the possibility that you might actually be mistaken?


    If I actually was mistaken then someone could
    point out the actual mistake. When I dare anyone
    to do that they change the subject.


    No, when your actual mistakes are pointed out,

    you do not understand them and come with baseless claims, like:


    It is always some counter-factual claim
    that can be proven false.


    where all competent programmers see that they are not counter-factual,
    but based on verifiable facts.
    Such as that the input to HHH is a pointer to memory that includes DDD
    and all functions used by it, including the code of Halt7.c, which
    specifies the abort and in this way a halting program.
    That HHH does not see that part of the specification does not change the specification, but shows the bug in HHH.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Mon May 26 16:32:41 2025
    On 5/26/25 11:11 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/26/2025 3:55 AM, vallor wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 15:43:17 -0500, olcott <[email protected]>
    wrote in
    <100vvd5$1i93o$[email protected]>:

    On 5/25/2025 3:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 14:40:38 -0500, olcott wrote:

    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 3:04 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 11:59 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    olcott <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:
    On 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> myself and Peter Olcott have to fight against.

    Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dishonesty.
    If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> too,
    and nothing would be left.


    _DDD()
    [00002192] 55             push ebp [00002193] 8bec >>>>>>>>>>>>> mov ebp,esp [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192 [0000219a]
    e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH [0000219f] >>>>>>>>>>>>> 83c404         add esp,+04 [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
    [000021a3] c3             ret Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]

    Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according to the >>>>>>>>>>>>> rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state.
    Why repeating this bug in HHH?

    That everyone that understands these things sees that there is >>>>>>>>>>> no bug ....

    That is untrue.  The bug is clear to anybody who understands C >>>>>>>>>> code.


    OK then to prove that you are not a damned liar (you won't do this >>>>>>>>> because you know that you are a liar)
    show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the rules of the x86 >>>>>>>>> language

    Which doesn't happen as you have admitted on the record:


    You Are the epitome of bad faith and dishonesty.

    That I call you out on your lies and back it up with evidence is
    anything but.

    You must be an atheist or you would fear telling these lies.

    I am an atheist mate and atheists have morals, arguably better morals
    than you as we do not do good things just for reward or to avoid
    punishment.

    /Flibble

    Atheists can have good morals.
    Christians may be aware that the bible says:
    Revelations 21:8 all liars, shall have their part in the lake which
    burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    Damnation doctrine is spiritual terrorism, and certainly
    has no place being discussed in comp.theory.

    Have you considered the "common denominator" in these discussions,
    and contemplated the possibility that you might actually be mistaken?


    If I actually was mistaken then someone could
    point out the actual mistake. When I dare anyone
    to do that they change the subject.


    We have,

    You ignore it thinking it can't be right because you are just too stupid.

    Thus, you just prove that you are just a stupid liar, to stupid to
    understand your error, and to stupid to even attempt to learn the rules
    of the game.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mikko@21:1/5 to olcott on Tue May 27 12:56:13 2025
    On 2025-05-26 16:16:29 +0000, olcott said:

    On 5/26/2025 11:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 26.mei.2025 om 17:11 schreef olcott:
    On 5/26/2025 3:55 AM, vallor wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 15:43:17 -0500, olcott <[email protected]> wrote in >>>> <100vvd5$1i93o$[email protected]>:

    On 5/25/2025 3:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 14:40:38 -0500, olcott wrote:

    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 3:04 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 11:59 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    olcott <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:
    On 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> myself and Peter Olcott have to fight against.

    Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dishonesty.
    If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too,
    and nothing would be left.


    _DDD()
    [00002192] 55             push ebp [00002193] 8bec >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mov ebp,esp [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192 [0000219a]
    e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH [0000219f] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 83c404         add esp,+04 [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
    [000021a3] c3             ret Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]

    Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state.
    Why repeating this bug in HHH?

    That everyone that understands these things sees that there is >>>>>>>>>>>>> no bug ....

    That is untrue.  The bug is clear to anybody who understands C >>>>>>>>>>>> code.


    OK then to prove that you are not a damned liar (you won't do this >>>>>>>>>>> because you know that you are a liar)
    show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the rules of the x86 >>>>>>>>>>> language

    Which doesn't happen as you have admitted on the record:


    You Are the epitome of bad faith and dishonesty.

    That I call you out on your lies and back it up with evidence is >>>>>>>> anything but.

    You must be an atheist or you would fear telling these lies.

    I am an atheist mate and atheists have morals, arguably better morals >>>>>> than you as we do not do good things just for reward or to avoid
    punishment.

    /Flibble

    Atheists can have good morals.
    Christians may be aware that the bible says:
    Revelations 21:8 all liars, shall have their part in the lake which
    burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    Damnation doctrine is spiritual terrorism, and certainly
    has no place being discussed in comp.theory.

    Have you considered the "common denominator" in these discussions,
    and contemplated the possibility that you might actually be mistaken?


    If I actually was mistaken then someone could
    point out the actual mistake. When I dare anyone
    to do that they change the subject.


    No, when your actual mistakes are pointed out,

    It is always some counter-factual claim
    that can be proven false.

    Your claims are often proven false but you only present tehm
    as counter-factual.

    --
    Mikko

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mikko@21:1/5 to olcott on Tue May 27 12:52:50 2025
    On 2025-05-26 15:11:13 +0000, olcott said:

    On 5/26/2025 3:55 AM, vallor wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 15:43:17 -0500, olcott <[email protected]> wrote in >> <100vvd5$1i93o$[email protected]>:

    On 5/25/2025 3:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 25 May 2025 14:40:38 -0500, olcott wrote:

    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 3:04 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 2:39 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 11:59 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    olcott <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/25/2025 10:49 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
    Op 25.mei.2025 om 16:36 schreef olcott:
    On 5/25/2025 1:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-05-24 01:20:18 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    So much bad faith and dishonesty shown in this forum that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> myself and Peter Olcott have to fight against.

    Everything here seems to be dishonesty and protests against >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dishonesty.
    If you could remove all dishonesty the protests woud stop, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> too,
    and nothing would be left.


    _DDD()
    [00002192] 55             push ebp [00002193] 8bec >>>>>>>>>>>>> mov ebp,esp [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192 [0000219a]
    e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH [0000219f] >>>>>>>>>>>>> 83c404         add esp,+04 [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
    [000021a3] c3             ret Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]

    Then acknowledge that DDD simulated by HHH according to the >>>>>>>>>>>>> rules of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state.
    Why repeating this bug in HHH?

    That everyone that understands these things sees that there is >>>>>>>>>>> no bug ....

    That is untrue.  The bug is clear to anybody who understands C >>>>>>>>>> code.


    OK then to prove that you are not a damned liar (you won't do this >>>>>>>>> because you know that you are a liar)
    show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the rules of the x86 >>>>>>>>> language

    Which doesn't happen as you have admitted on the record:


    You Are the epitome of bad faith and dishonesty.

    That I call you out on your lies and back it up with evidence is
    anything but.

    You must be an atheist or you would fear telling these lies.

    I am an atheist mate and atheists have morals, arguably better morals
    than you as we do not do good things just for reward or to avoid
    punishment.

    /Flibble

    Atheists can have good morals.
    Christians may be aware that the bible says:
    Revelations 21:8 all liars, shall have their part in the lake which
    burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    Damnation doctrine is spiritual terrorism, and certainly
    has no place being discussed in comp.theory.

    Have you considered the "common denominator" in these discussions,
    and contemplated the possibility that you might actually be mistaken?


    If I actually was mistaken then someone could
    point out the actual mistake. When I dare anyone
    to do that they change the subject.

    People have shown your actual mistakes. You have changed the subject
    when they have done that.

    --
    Mikko

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)