[QUOTE=Jwb52z;311511]I really want to know how/why you'd know before I do, but you're being sort of snotty about things, so don't bother telling me.[/QUOTE]

Calm down.

Iff you have systems which automatically report their results then others might know the results before you do.

Iff you are in full control of the reporting you will be the first to know. But only iff you are observant.

Is it just me, or it the tension high?

[QUOTE=chalsall;311513]only iff you are observant.[/quote]The Redundancy Department of Redundancy called... :razz:
[QUOTE=chalsall;311513]
Is it just me, or it the tension high?[/QUOTE]
My usual response is to ignore it when someone's being stupid. (Note that my post count in response to cheesehead's silliness is pretty low. (Also note that cheesehead makes a lot of not-silly posts, to be "politically correct".))

[QUOTE=chalsall;311513]Calm down.

Iff you have systems which automatically report their results then others might know the results before you do.

Iff you are in full control of the reporting you will be the first to know. But only iff you are observant.

Is it just me, or it the tension high?[/QUOTE]How do you expect me, or anyone else, to react when you are basically saying you're the judge of all things pertaining to what is and is not valid or worthy enough or interesting enough or important enough to talk about in relation to factors, especially in a thread that's suppose to be [B]FUN[/B]. The phrase "pissing in someone's cornflakes" comes to mind at times like this. I apologize if that's not allowed to be said on this forum. Ugh!

[QUOTE=Jwb52z;311520]The phrase "pissing in someone's cornflakes" comes to mind at times like this. I apologize if that's not allowed to be said on this forum. Ugh![/QUOTE]

Oh no, please continue. Many supermods have said much worse (not really chalsall though).

[QUOTE=Jwb52z;311520]How do you expect me, or anyone else, to react when you are basically saying you're the judge of all things pertaining to what is and is not valid or worthy enough or interesting enough or important enough to talk about in relation to factors, especially in a thread that's suppose to be [B]FUN[/B]. The phrase "pissing in someone's cornflakes" comes to mind at times like this. I apologize if that's not allowed to be said on this forum. Ugh![/QUOTE]

IMHO, you are overreacting.

[QUOTE=chalsall;311523]IMHO, you are overreacting.[/QUOTE]

I gotta side with Jwb52z here. It's a harmless thread, why get involved with negative comments?

IMO, your response would be much more appropriate if someone started a *new* thread saying "Look at the 90-bit factor I found with P-1!!!".

Thank you for the support, P95.

A relative smooth P-1 factor above 2[SUP]100[/SUP] found a couple of days ago:
P-1 found a factor in stage #1, B1=570000.
M56916199 has a factor: 192514199269068153431847285313537 (107.24 Bits; k = 1691207447541148640581632 = 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 7 * 11 * 227 * 1931 * 2141 * 9643 * 43891)

[QUOTE=TheJudger;311629]A relative smooth P-1 factor above 2[SUP]100[/SUP] found a couple of days ago:
P-1 found a factor in stage #1, B1=570000.
M56916199 has a factor: 192514199269068153431847285313537 (107.24 Bits; k = 1691207447541148640581632 = 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 7 * 11 * 227 * 1931 * 2141 * 9643 * 43891)[/QUOTE]

....wow

2^11. B1=43K and >100 bits.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;311633]....wow

2^11. B1=43K and >100 bits.[/QUOTE]

Even better... B1=10K, B2=44K...

Luigi

(Now that I think about it... which one would be faster?)

[QUOTE=ET_;311657]Even better... B1=10K, B2=44K...

Luigi

(Now that I think about it... which one would be faster?)[/QUOTE]That one.