[QUOTE=LaurV;388303]To be back on track: just pointing out that, according with factorDB, this number is known to be composite since (about) March 2011. As Batalov said, the guy is either innocent (in the bad sense) or a bot.

[edit: I am also interested in the discussion started by CRG's question, for some "general" case][/QUOTE]


Which number, please?

I lost you here.

Thanks!

Eugene Goostman? Is that you?

[URL="http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=73507&postid=1508549#1508549"]This BOINC user[/URL] claims to be storflyt. Strangely, he manages to be both more comprehensible and less comprehensible in some of his posts there. Take a look at his posts on that thread. He says, "[URL="http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=73507&postid=1508619#1508619"]Enjoy[/URL]," and then replies to himself, saying, "Enjoying." There's reply after nonsensical reply to himself. But then comes [URL="http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=73507&postid=1509207#1509207"]this post[/URL], which makes a (comparatively) astounding amount of sense.

While we are suggesting bannings, can we take a vote on what human we can ban next? I've got a vote I'd like to cast. Anonymously, of course, because I'm a coward.

That is a correct assumption, but not the total answer to a given problem.

[url]http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1000000000012154120[/url]

Or, to be more precise

[url]http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000212123761[/url]

You see, I fell in love with this number because there apparently is no easy way at getting to the answer of this problem.

All those composite numbers that are in between that are odd and also does not end in 5 have to be more or less factorized.

For some numbers it becomes easy. For other ones again it becomes a hard thing to do.

If I try dividing this number with another composite number, or preferably a prime factor, I eventually expect it to do so.

For now it does not do so however.

The closest we probably came here was the number 3 multiplied with 2 quite large prime factors.

Right now this number lies here on another disc which has become stuck.

Using Yafu, I try using the command ecm(ans) or ecm(ans,30) meaning a more in-depth 30-curves factorization on a given
number. You may try so on the RSA-1024 or RSA-2048 numbers as an example. You will probably not be able to succeed here.

If a given number stands such a 30 curve factorization without giving in no more, I then next try dividing this number from
the C1133.

If the number I get stands out I next try factorizing it further using the Yafu factor command.

By experience I happen to know that dividing a composite number with another composite number is not a good thing to do, but
for this C1133 which is having no known factors, there appears to be an exception for this assumption.

Usually, when factorizing the number I get, the first factor is a small one. I may get something like 4964683539819829097117,

which is a C22 that next factorizes into 61*101*293*449*1723*47701*74527.

Dividing the C1133 into this number or something else gives me a cyclic circle of mostly composite numbers that apparently
never is ending.

At times I become a little more lucky while doing so.

[url]http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000732465229[/url]

My lucky one tonight.

However the P309 there does not divide neither from RSA-2048 nor the C1133.

[QUOTE=Jayder;388705]Eugene Goostman? Is that you?

[URL="http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=73507&postid=1508549#1508549"]This BOINC user[/URL] claims to be storflyt. Strangely, he manages to be both more comprehensible and less comprehensible in some of his posts there. Take a look at his posts on that thread. He says, "[URL="http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=73507&postid=1508619#1508619"]Enjoy[/URL]," and then replies to himself, saying, "Enjoying." There's reply after nonsensical reply to himself. But then comes [URL="http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=73507&postid=1509207#1509207"]this post[/URL], which makes a (comparatively) astounding amount of sense.

[B]While we are suggesting bannings, can we take a vote on what human we can ban next?[/B] I've got a vote I'd like to cast. Anonymously, of course, because I'm a coward.[/QUOTE]

Ooh! Let's have a lottery and stone the loser! :edit:

I was able to read Jayder's post only after posting my previous one here.

Definitely privacy is not guaranteed when you are using the web and making your voice there.

To be more precise.

I am neither of these ones. I happen to be someone else.

But start screaming. Make a fuzz out of it. Big things - small things, something for you to either enjoy or perhaps dislike.

Some people are supposed to be making science out of certain things.

Other people chooses to rather be making a sensation of it instead.

At times the true story becomes hard to believe.

A story is always supposed to be having given facts.

Are we always supposed to be believing in such stories and is it perhaps supposed to embarass or hurt at times when it possibly hits back at you?

Better have a solid heart and stomach when trying to be brave or just curious.

To late to edit. Lost my changes.

Was to say that the web also now has become an important place when it comes to both storage as well as how we are dealing with and handling the information that is now present there.

At times some early experience becomes forgotten and you only are being remindered when it for some reason happen to stumble across you once again.

Thanks to some other recent postings here I was able to retrieve a PRP948 that resulted from a factorization of a number.

Not too bad when it happens.

[url]http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1000000000045106006[/url]


C:\Users\...\winpfgw>pfgw64 -q("2^85982+1)/9300928793082484045"
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]

(2^85982+1)/9300928793082484045 is composite: RES64: [2CFCA2741BAE4653] (21.6781s+0.0007s)

Testing "Lara".

She is supposed to be cute.

By the way, if you did not know it already, she happens to be just a bot.

Make up your own mind about the subject.

[IMG]<img src="http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss355/mittbilde32/r-LARA-LOGAN-large570_zps401097cf.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo r-LARA-LOGAN-large570_zps401097cf.jpg"/></a>[/IMG]

For now I am apparently not successful.

Need your suggestions when it comes to either the link or the contents.

Which in the end should not be nothing new.

Okay. Linking apparently did not work out right now.

What about an attachment instead while I try solving this problem?

Testing "Lara".

She is supposed to be cute.

By the way, if you did not know it already, she happens to be just a bot.

[IMG]http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss355/mittbilde32/r-LARA-LOGAN-large570_zps401097cf.jpg[/IMG]

Anyway, I hear you screaming already.

Tried it out. Linking apparently did not work out.

Oh, another one?

Apparently no tonight.

Testing a ban for spam for 3 days.

Next time around you will tell us if it helped.

FWIW, she is [URL="https://www.chatbots.org/virtual_assistant/lara/"]commercial[/URL], described on the web as "one of the best", and it has a well defined job to do. No girlie chat... :razz: