[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;358575]Paranoid? No.

But I've never known you to be furtive.[/QUOTE]You[SUP]*[/SUP] learn something everyday;.

Paul

* That is the generic you, which may or may not imply the specific you.

[QUOTE=xilman;358578]That EPFL are usign supercomputers rather than new algorithms[/QUOTE]

Ah. Actually, that suggestion came from Jason (post 212) and bsquared
(post 216). I also took your quote from 2010 at face value.....

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;358564] ... Such resources are in demand
for real world problems. Factoring Cunningham numbers isn't all that
important.

I was [b]really[/b] hoping that they had found an algorithmic improvement.....[/QUOTE]

As I read the paper's conclusion (and infer a part of the motivation for
such a careful formulation of the resources actually used), the authors
disagree with your view. They're in favor of "a greater appreciation of ...
cryptanalytic activities ..." on the part of the HPC community; and
more funding, in particular. -Bruce

RE: ReseachGate: and then none of the papers I coauthored are actually
in the references ... still, I wasn't aware of this paper, before signing up.
Brent referred me ages ago; I got caught on checking my citations in the
new note on Herman's history of CWI.

Speaking of which, did I detect a tease for new algorithms?

[QUOTE=bdodson;358595]As I read the paper's conclusion (and infer a part of the motivation for
such a careful formulation of the resources actually used), the authors
disagree with your view. They're in favor of "a greater appreciation of ...
cryptanalytic activities ..." on the part of the HPC community; and
more funding, in particular. -Bruce

RE: ReseachGate: [/QUOTE]

We agree about funding for crypto research. I was referring specifically
to just "Cunningham numbers". They are not terribly important.

[QUOTE=jasonp;353664]I think it's more likely they just have a ton of computers now, plus possibly a new version of lasieve. Either Franke or Kleinjung said about a year ago that they were working on a new siever, to be ready in a year or so.

NFS@Home can turn around one of those jobs in 2-3 months, so their reservations look ambitious but would be thin evidence of a theoretical improvement.[/QUOTE]

It's been 3 months without a peep. Are they waiting to announce
the completion of all of them or are they still working on their first?

I would assume that they have more resources than NFS@Home.
[let me know if I am wrong].

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;361673]It's been 3 months without a peep. Are they waiting to announce
the completion of all of them or are they still working on their first?

I would assume that they have more resources than NFS@Home.
[let me know if I am wrong].[/QUOTE]

It's now 4 months without a peep..........

I truly hope that it is because they have something new,
[even just an incremental improvement!] rather
than just grabbing 4 years worth of work at once.

The best case is that they have a way to sieve several numbers in parallel. And have nearly finished sieving them all (or started LA on the first batch) and will soon start posting results.

Dream on ...

Chris

[QUOTE=xilman;353616]Hmmm...

I'll see what I can glean, which is not likely to be very much. Even if I do discover something I may think it may be wiser not to say anything about it.[/QUOTE]Not found anything yet but, there again, I've not tried very hard.

Anyone prepared to be more blatant?

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;364181]It's now 4 months without a peep..........

I truly hope that it is because they have something new,
[even just an incremental improvement!] rather
than just grabbing 4 years worth of work at once.[/QUOTE]

5 Months and going strong.......Still no results.........

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;367302]5 Months and going strong.......Still no results.........[/QUOTE]

I am puzzled. It's been 6+ months and we still don't have even a single
result.

I applaud their efforts, but it would be nice to know what those efforts
really are! Are they waiting to finish ALL of them before announcing
their results?

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;370042]I am puzzled. It's been 6+ months and we still don't have even a single
result.

I applaud their efforts, but it would be nice to know what those efforts
really are! Are they waiting to finish ALL of them before announcing
their results?[/QUOTE]

Still no news?