Fast factorization method or crankery?

[10metreh]

Someone has created a project called GIFFS - Great Internet Fast Factorization Search - to "search" for a way of working out the factors of n from the factors of n-1. The homepage is here.
I haven't looked through it all, but the fact that they say

Since Aristophanes described his sieve

makes me think they probably don't know what they're doing.

[henryzz]

Originally Posted by 10metreh

Someone has created a project called GIFFS - Great Internet Fast Factorization Search - to "search" for a way of working out the factors of n from the factors of n-1. The homepage is here.
I haven't looked through it all, but the fact that they say makes me think they probably don't know what they're doing.

I have seen this before(he posted on the PrimeNumbers mailing list).

Originally Posted by Cris Stringfellow

Hi All,

Just to let you know, there's a new project some of you may be interested in joining.

It's called the Great Internet Fast Factorization Search, and it is meant to be a collaborative effort to find a new factorization algorithm.

Don't know if it's going to work, but it does have some good credentials, a new representation of integers, and an algorithm structure.

They're looking for people with ideas. Could be you guys.

Cheers,

Cris

Here was David Broadhurst's response:

Originally Posted by David Broadhurst

I do not think that it will work. Some of the smartest
individuals on planet Earth have thought, long and hard,
about factorization and our current algorithms derive from
their earnest endeavours. Simply announcing the proposal of
a glorified internet "think-tank" is rather unlikely to add
new gems, in my opinion. The internet is a great place to
instantiate existing ideas. New ideas are more often
developed in private, by methods of thought known only to
their inspired inventors (and sometimes not even by them).
Then they are meticulously published, for peer review by
other experts, who kick themselves for "not having thought
about that".

I should be glad to proved wrong; yet the prospects are meagre.

David

David later followed it up with:

Originally Posted by David Broadhurst

I have now found the quote that was ringing in my mind.
It was, of course, Huxley on Darwin:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/02/2/l_022_09.html
"How extremely stupid not to have thought of that!"

David (even more stupid than Huxley :-)

It is probably a pointless project. The group has only about 10 members and only Cris has every posted anything(I havent checked in the last couple of days so don't quote me on that).

[retina]

Originally Posted by henryzz

It is probably a pointless project. The group has only about 10 members and only Cris has every posted anything(I havent checked in the last couple of days so don't quote me on that).

So, it is dead because it has few members, or it has few members because it is dead? Which comes first, the chicken or the egg?

[henryzz]

Originally Posted by retina

So, it is dead because it has few members, or it has few members because it is dead? Which come first, the chicken or the egg?

I don't really think it was alive. Although Cris has posted 13 times there now. The latest was 2 days ago according to my email.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by retina

So, it is dead because it has few members, or it has few members because it is dead? Which comes first, the chicken or the egg?

The Norwegian Blue, of course.

Paul

[retina]

Originally Posted by xilman

The Norwegian Blue, of course.

And you try 'n tell the young people o' today that, they won't believe ya.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by xilman

The Norwegian Blue, of course.

Paul

Beautiful Plumage!