On 8/9/25 8:33 PM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-08-10 at 08:26 +0800, wij wrote:
olcott has always changed his POO Problem 'silently' from H(D)=0,1,both,... >> This time, HHH(DD)==0 is correct is just another circle (run out of option) >> Each change takes about a coupe of months, silently.
The point is that each time the new answer contradicts the previous one.
He had to lie. So, be warned, you are debating with a liar.
I cannot search the long history. The following is a post just now, provided for convenience for future readers.
On 8/9/2025 6:12 PM, dbush wrote:
On 8/9/2025 7:03 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 09/08/2025 23:38, olcott wrote:
Until you bother to put in the effort to understand
that the behavior of DD correctly simulated by HHH
is different than the behavior of the directly executed
DD() you will not be able to begin to understand the
next step of my proof.
Since your prerequisite is manifestly absurd, I don't see anyone
understanding your proof any time soon.
He has admitted in the past
Everything that I said prior to one week ago has
been deprecated.
So, be prepared, olcott can say the same thing again.
And, by saying that, he has also thrown away EVERYTHING he claimed in
the past, so anything he hasn't tried to "misdefine" in the past week
now has the real definition, so point it out, and ask for justifcation.
Since he doesn't have any, he is stuck, he can't use his past lies to
justify things anymore, or his 22 years of work, unless he can show
actual results from it.
In particular, he needs to go through his justification for changing definitions (for which there isn't any in a formal system).
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)