The inimitable RDS

[pinhodecarlos]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I wonder if Mr. Silverman wrote the operating system he runs his software on. Or the compiler used to compile it. Or designed and built the CPUs which execute his code. Or designed and built the generator which powers his systems. Or discovered and refines the fuel for the generator. Or, or, or....

Of course...he built his own house, made its electric project, water system, etc. He has a bicycle to generate his own electricity when he is not on the forum messing around. He built his own fridge, plants his own food (he never goes to the supermarket)...and he filters the rain to use it as water...His a genius. We are all ignorants, why can't you guys understand?

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

But I DO have something good to say.

No, Mr. Silverman.

You've been repeatedly informed that you are ignorant about motivation in recreational mathematics, yet you keep butting in where you have no expertise!

I'm trying to dissuade mathematically ignorant people from pursuing a futile effort.

You keep demonstrating your incompetence in understanding such things. Please stop -- we've all been quite convinced of your inadequacy here, so your repetitions don't even serve as examples to avoid anymore.

And finding the prime itself adds no value to mathematics.

Your postings in the vein of this one add no value to the forum discussion, yet you keep on repeating them.

You are providing your own examples of useless postings!! How do you expect that your doing so would dissuade anyone else from making useless postings?

A new algorithm might, but the prime itself is a mere numerical curiosity.

A new insight might be of value, but your repetitions of the same old non-insights are mere annoyances.

I really don't like the way ignorant people pursue hopeless
projects when there are many projects that are NOT hopeless.

We don't like the way you keep posting your hopeless diatribes when there are so many other subjects about which you could usefully contribute.

Finally, I am qualified to judge the merits of an effort in computational number theory.

You have repeatedly demonstrated that you are unskilled in judging the merit of amateur ventures in computational mathematics, yet you mistakenly and bizarrely rate your ability to do so as much higher than average.

"This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I wonder if Mr. Silverman wrote the operating system he runs his software on.

I did not. But I have written pieces of OS in the past. I know how.
The people running these computational codes are clueless as to how
they work.

Or the compiler used to compile it.

I have written compilers. Not the particular one I use, but again I know how.

Or designed and built the CPUs which execute his code. Or designed and built the generator which powers his systems. Or discovered and refines the fuel for the generator. Or, or, or....

You are confusing the use of GENERIC COMMODITIES for which one
actually pays real money to use with custom computational software which
the IGG seems to think they are somehow entitled to. Despite being
clueless about how they work or what they are doing.

[c10ck3r]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

I did not. But I have written pieces of OS in the past. I know how.
The people running these computational codes are clueless as to how
they work. *Snip*
You are confusing the use of GENERIC COMMODITIES for which one
actually pays real money to use with custom computational software which
the IGG seems to think they are somehow entitled to. Despite being
clueless about how they work or what they are doing.

So let me get this straight...you can write a portion of an OS based on SOMEONE ELSE'S programming language. Sweet.
Also, I thought I should point out that many members of this forum use copies of the software only as a basepoint, modifying certain criteria or altering the way it shifts bits or performs multiplication or or or...
See http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=16645&page=3
post 51 or 63
for one of many examples.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

You are confusing the use of GENERIC COMMODITIES for which one actually pays real money to use with custom computational software which the IGG seems to think they are somehow entitled to. Despite being clueless about how they work or what they are doing.

I'm typing this into a Chrome browser running on a Linux machine. Chrome, along with most of the rest of the software on this system, was compiled with gcc. Another X11 window is displaying progress in the final sqrt stage of a SNFS factorization being performed by msieve / ggnfs.

All of those components (Linux, Chrome, gcc, X11, msieve and ggnfs) have been provided to me on a cost-free basis. All I have put into them is the copying cost, whether DVD or download, and no real money has changed hands. Each of them are items of special-purpose software which address a specific range of tasks, whether running processes, displaying HTML, generating executable binaries, displaying windows or factoring integers.

My point: factoring integers can also be done with GENERIC COMMODITIES, to use your terminology.

I agree with you that one should know how ones commodities work, to some degree or other, and to be able to create ones own version of a commodity in principle. Like you, I've written lesser or greater chunks of compilers, operating systems and factoring software. AFAIK, I've not written anything for a windowing display or web browser (though I've written networking code which reads and/or writes to remote systems). I've no intention of returning to a text-only interface and interfacing to web servers through wget and telnet.

Paul

P.S. This appeared between my typing the first paragraph and submitting my post

prp56 factor: 32298809613931262915054258065935044472582969532921532959
prp92 factor: 26956143622528922629687854445998393760040400388144046976043450874016136060691787667991204273

Another small GCW bites the dust.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by xilman

IMy point: factoring integers can also be done with GENERIC COMMODITIES, to use your terminology.

Please name a single company that sells such software. I do not consider
msieve, for example, to be a generic commodity.

I agree with you that one should know how ones commodities work, to some degree or other,

Many/most of the cranks who post here are CLUELESS about how the
code works that they are using, and they know even less about the
mathematics.

But of course, they want CREDIT if the black box code that they run
produces something. This is like expecting credit for a college essay
that was written by someone else. I find this attitude to be contemptible.

And of course, in their arrogance, they refuse to listen when an expert
tells them that an attempted computation is futile. Indeed, they seem to
resent it when an expert tells them anything that runs contrary to their
fantasies.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by xilman

Each of them are items of special-purpose software which address a specific range of tasks, whether running processes,

<snip>

This last statement is idiotic. e.g. An operating system is used for MANY
DIFFERENT THINGS. It is not "special-purpose" under any stretch
of the imagination. OTOH, factoring software or prime proving software
has only ONE purpose.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

This last statement is idiotic. e.g. An operating system is used for MANY
DIFFERENT THINGS. It is not "special-purpose" under any stretch
of the imagination. OTOH, factoring software or prime proving software
has only ONE purpose.

This thread is drifting from its origins. The original post was about
finding a million-digit prime. Such a computation is hopeless without
better algorithms. But, as always, the cranks herein reject
expert advice. They run code without understanding how it works and
which is based upon mathematics that they can't be bothered learning.

It is of course their computer time (and electricity costs) to waste.

It is their priviledge to undertake a task which, even if it succeeds,
provides nothing useful to anyone else. If they think that it is "fun",
that is their right.

But expecting "credit" for doing something that has little value and which
they do not understand is both pathetic and childish.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Please name a single company that sells such software. I do not consider msieve, for example, to be a generic commodity.

I can't, off-hand, think of a single company which sells a web browser. MSFT got into trouble for giving away their browser.

Numerous Linux and BSD distributions include GMP-ECM in their standard distribution packages. It is possible to purchase DVDs of those distributions from a number of re-packaging companies.

TBH, I'm having difficulties interpreting your "company that sells such software". I've difficulty in seeing why either "company" or "selling" is of any great importance.

Please be clear: I'm with you all the way in that credit given for an achievement should be strongly correlated with the amount of effort expended.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

This last statement is idiotic. e.g. An operating system is used for MANY DIFFERENT THINGS. It is not "special-purpose" under any stretch of the imagination. OTOH, factoring software or prime proving software has only ONE purpose.

If I concede that an OS has many uses when looked at closely enough (some operating systems not only run other software components, they also provide them with a file system!) would you concede that factoring and primality proving software may be used for mathematical research, security testing and research, entertainment, hardware stress-testing and performance measurement & optimization?

[literka]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Many/most of the cranks who post here are CLUELESS about how the
code works that they are using, and they know even less about the
mathematics.

But of course, they want CREDIT if the black box code that they run
produces something. This is like expecting credit for a college essay
that was written by someone else. I find this attitude to be contemptible.

And of course, in their arrogance, they refuse to listen when an expert
tells them that an attempted computation is futile. Indeed, they seem to
resent it when an expert tells them anything that runs contrary to their
fantasies.

Suppose that 5 years old girl accidentally starts a program for new Fermat factors and writes parameters without knowing what she is doing. Suppose that after some time computer gives a result. Then she is a legitimate discoverer. Probably she would be quoted in mathematical books not to mention internet.
But according to Silverman she is a crank and she does not deserve any credit. Crank quoted in books and experts not quoted in books.