Re: [PO] Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?

From: Peter Olcott (olcott_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 08/30/04 

Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:57:28 GMT

"Simon G Best" <s.g.best@btopenworld.com> wrote in message news:4133071C.1000003@btopenworld.com...
> Peter Olcott wrote:
> > "Simon G Best" <s.g.best@btopenworld.com> wrote in message news:41325694.3060409@btopenworld.com...
> >
> >>Peter Olcott wrote:
> [...]
>
> Less than two days ago, I wrote (in another thread):
>
> > If you actually read the replies to your posts properly, /all/ the way
> > through, you'd have already realised that this has been pointed out to
> > you and explained to you many, /many/, *many* times.
>
> And then you replied:
>
> > I do read them all the way through, at least in your case, and Daryl's
> > case, ever since you two correctly refuted me at least once each.
>
> But then, in this thread, you wrote:
>
> >>>[...] SInce there is a very good chance that
> >>>this eliminates the rest of your material, I will not read it
> >>>in this case. [...]
> >>
> >>But without reading it, you don't know.
> >>
> >>Your decision not to read our responses to your posts does not mean that
> >>we aren't refuting and debunking your claims. It does, however, mean
> >>that you're repeatedly ignoring the many refutations and debunkings of
> >>your claims.
> >>
> >>I'll respond to the rest of your response once you've actually read
> >>through what you're responding to.
>
> Obviously, when you say "I do read them all the way through", it doesn't
> mean that you do read them all the way through. Instead, it means
> you'll carry on assuming things about things you haven't even bothered
> to read.
>
> And now you're saying:
>
> > I am giving news_to_me@comcast.net (underscores added for emphasis)
> > my highest priority because he claims to be a PhD computer science
> > professor. His last posting to me was intended to form the basis for
> > refuting any combinations of all of my methods. We selected one of
> > the methods to test his basis on this method.
>
> You say that, but you also said, "I do read them all the way through, at
> least in your case". That quickly turned out not to be true. What you
> say just can't be relied upon.
>
> Simon
>

No I just changed my mind with respect to that one posting.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [PO] Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?
    ... > Peter Olcott wrote: ... >> my highest priority because he claims to be a PhD computer science ... >> the methods to test his basis on this method. ... No I just changed my mind with respect to that one posting. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Halting Problem: Give up
    ... including this posting, ... 1646 news articles in comp.theory. ... presented which all competent commentators recognize ... Peter Olcott: ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Halting Problem: Give up
    ... including this posting, ... 1646 news articles in comp.theory. ... presented which all competent commentators recognize ... Peter Olcott: ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Can you find anything wrong with this solution to the Halting Problem?
    ... In sci.logic, Peter Olcott ... > LoopIfHalts() from providing the means to show that WillHalt() ... I have eliminated its entire basis. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: What the FUCK???
    ... Me = many years of experience IN the RF business ... Me = most always using FACT as my basis for posting ... and/or personal experience, ...
    (alt.cellular.verizon)