What server should I connect to if I'm frustrated by not finding factors?

[jasong]

Right now, I'm running ecm on two servers, 95% OPN search and 5% on one which I call Euler, plus my Windows machine which doesn't seem to give the option of more than one server at a time.

I'd like to find a few factors before I go back to that ratio, so what should I do? Should I go my own way? Is there a server where I'm likely to find 15-25 digit factors, not impressive but at least I'd feel like I accomplished something.

[rogue]

Originally Posted by jasong

Right now, I'm running ecm on two servers, 95% OPN search and 5% on one which I call Euler, plus my Windows machine which doesn't seem to give the option of more than one server at a time.

I'd like to find a few factors before I go back to that ratio, so what should I do? Should I go my own way? Is there a server where I'm likely to find 15-25 digit factors, not impressive but at least I'd feel like I accomplished something.

I have a couple of suggestions. First, try Paul Leyland's BMtR server. You are not likely to find any 15-25 digit factors, but there should be plenty in the 30-35 digit range. Second, you can try to factor composites from Paul's Generalized Cullen and Generalized Woodall lists. Many of the tables have only been factored to 25 digits. You might want to set up your own server and have the factors reported to Paul automatically (as I do).

[akruppa]

This does not really relate to GMP-ECM itself but factoring in general. Thread moved.

Alex

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by jasong

Right now, I'm running ecm on two servers, 95% OPN search and 5% on one which I call Euler, plus my Windows machine which doesn't seem to give the option of more than one server at a time.

I'd like to find a few factors before I go back to that ratio, so what should I do? Should I go my own way? Is there a server where I'm likely to find 15-25 digit factors, not impressive but at least I'd feel like I accomplished something.

If it were EASY then it wouldn't be worth doing.

[Jwb52z]

Dr. Silverman, not everyone feels that something has to be a trial or hardship to be worth doing.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by Jwb52z

Dr. Silverman, not everyone feels that something has to be a trial or hardship to be worth doing.

Especially those members of the "instant gratification generation".

Using software written by others to achieve easy computations should
not convey a sense of satisfaction to anyone who has a sense of pride.
One takes pride in accomplishing something that requires EFFORT. Things
that require no effort are not worthy accomplishments.

It is too bad that you and others fail to understand this. Maybe you will
understand when you grow up.

[Xyzzy]

One of my favorite quotes:

"The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value. I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death." -- Thomas Paine

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

members of the "instant gratification generation".

Of which generation are you?

One takes pride in accomplishing something that requires EFFORT. Things that require no effort are not worthy accomplishments.

Since it's obviously quite effortless for you to compose and post these "strict father" authoritarian missives, you must not take much pride in doing so -- right?

And when you give up on interpreting a novice's question and dismiss it as "Total gibberish" (http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...93&postcount=4), rather than perservering with the task of determining what the poster meant, that, too, is something in which you take no pride -- correct? Except that you think it worthy to post a public notification of your quitting the task, so that you take pride in letting us know when you've failed? Or ... ?

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

Of which generation are you?

Since it's obviously quite effortless for you to compose and post these "strict father" authoritarian missives, you must not take much pride in doing so -- right?

And when you give up on interpreting a novice's question and dismiss it as "Total gibberish" (http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...93&postcount=4), rather than perservering with the task of determining what the poster meant, that, too, is something in which you take no pride -- correct? Except that you think it worthy to post a public notification of your quitting the task, so that you take pride in letting us know when you've failed? Or ... ?

You really are an idiot. You are truly clueless. I read the post indicated
by your URL quite carefully. It really made zero sense whatsoever. It
just bandied words about with no clear meaning. I do and will take the time
to answer questions. I will not take the time to answer questions that
are gibberish. I did not "give up on the question". The question itself
was meaningless. It also show a total lack of understanding how ECM
works in the first place. I will answer questions that

(1) Show the poster has made some effort to understand the problem
(2) Can not be readily answered by 10 minutes of work with Google

It is clear that the O.P. failed (1).

You have chosen the perfect pseudonym for yourself.

[wblipp]

You've gotta love Bob. There isn't anybody else on these boards that provides his kind of humor. He provides so many fun messages that it's hard to pick your favorites. I think my favorite of all time was the one where he said a formula in his paper that produces negative probabilities must be correct because it had been peer reviewed. Close behind that would be the followup where he claims the wrong formula is incredibly difficult to check, even though Brent published the correct formula and skipped the derivation as “trivial modifications” to the arguments of Knuth and Traub.

This most recent message brings back memories of a different series of really fun posts from Bob, though. That one started with his claim that there was overwhelming evidence that no odd perfect numbers existed. At the time I was not familiar with papers like the Zelinsky preprint that point out that no such heuristics exist, so I was eager to learn more. Bob has often posted messages like the one above where he says that he is willing to help prepared students, so I documented my preparation and asked for his help. What great fun when his response was that this was a public forum and he was free to say anything he wanted! This particular chain then continued with Bob posting that "anybody who doubted him should just ask Richard Brent." I finally had to spill the beans on that little joke, because Richard Brent is perfectly willing to tell anybody that although he doubts odd perfect numbers exist. he knows of no convincing heuristic and would not be particular surprised if one should turn up. What a prankster our Bob is!

[Jwb52z]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Especially those members of the "instant gratification generation".

Using software written by others to achieve easy computations should
not convey a sense of satisfaction to anyone who has a sense of pride.
One takes pride in accomplishing something that requires EFFORT. Things
that require no effort are not worthy accomplishments.

It is too bad that you and others fail to understand this. Maybe you will
understand when you grow up.

First of all, I'm not a child. Second of all, I'm not even a teenager. OK? I don't think everything should be "right now just because I want it," but there's a difference between, "I feel good because I helped" which is also valuable, and "I don't think it's valuable unless I had to kill myself to do it." You seem to think something has to be mind blearingly awful and hard to be happy about doing it. That's sad.