I did not vote on any comments in this post. However, I believe the downvotes were because your tone sounds combative and supercilious, and you missed both Tyrrell's point and Vladimir's:

• Your description of Tyrrell's theory makes it sound like it changes the UDT algorithm to a GLUT, while Tyrrell was just proposing a new interpretation of the same algorithm

• Vladimir meant his comment about the increment algorithm to show by example that an algorithm which is not updateless can be interpreted as doing something because it's right just as easily as an updateless algorithm can.

• Neither of these would've been judged so harshly if you hadn't phrased your replies like you were addressing a learning-disabled child instead of an intelligent AI researcher.