Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Sixteen or Bust

Expand Messages
  • Paul Jobling
    Well, I have read the correspondence, and I have to say that there seems to be a little fault on both sides - from this group there has been some carping and
    Message 1 of 34 , Dec 2, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Well, I have read the correspondence, and I have to say that there seems to be
      a little fault on both sides - from this group there has been some carping and
      uninformed bitching; from SoB there perhaps wasn't as much openness as there
      could have been. I'm not going to criticise anybody over this, I just think
      that there are lessons to be learnt going forward. At the end of the day,
      though, SoB did succeed in putting together a team who managed to crack one
      exponent so far; and they also seem to have used the best tools for the job
      and I think that we ought to give them credit for that. Okay, perhaps some
      exponents were tested twice, and perhaps people had their ranges poached
      without being informed. That is not desirable, and I would hope that should
      this sort of situation arise again, it will be managed in a more transparent
      manner. All of that is behind us now, though, and I think we should be
      grateful for the fruits of this labour.

      This is the main post at the SoB forum regarding the situation:

      _______________________________________


      If the discovery hadn't happened when it did, we would have had time to put
      together a page of people to thank. one will be put together when we get back.
      it was all we could do at the time to put up what we did before we had to
      leave to see our families for the holidays.


      Sadly, Ray's comments are some of the more carefully chosen words i've seen on
      that forum. And also possibly the only informed ones. From the begining, that
      yahoo forum has been a haven of SB bashing... long before even the latest spat
      of criticism. I have seen so many negitive things posted there... it's so sad.
      And honestly, I think Ray is the only one there who has any idea what's really
      going on. He did recieve the majority of my (lengthy) corrispondence with
      Wilfrid before and after he decided to take down his site. Everyone else there
      is just dealing with frustration and lashing out at SB. I feel especially bad
      for Phil as I did use his sieveing data and now he apprently hates us even
      though he doesn't know us. I'm sorry man, I still want to thank you though.
      Same goes for Ian Lowman and all the other previous searchers. Thank you for
      the work you have done. No one here has forgetten your efforts and the amature
      math community appriciates your support.

      Anyway, here's why I'm not worried... none of these people know us or
      understand any of the things we've done. I haven't seen a negitive comment
      come from anyone who has ever even bothered to email us. I've never seen
      anyone on their forum mention one of my emails to Keller in which I offered to
      let the individual participants choose to keep their k values. I gave him
      suggestions on ways the two searches could continue together. No one knows
      that side of the story... the one where I tried to explain and work with
      someone who I just couldn't get across to. Instead of talking to me, Keller
      blew me off, takes down his site, poisons the minds of everyone he knows and
      then sends me dictionary definitions like i'm an 8 year old. So, yeah it was
      hard to work with the other searchers and it was mostly because their former
      organiser had absolutely zero respect for me. I'll probably never know why
      that was... I can guess, but then I would only be doing what the people on
      yahoo are... making stuff up to get angery about. All I know for sure is
      Wilfrid Keller clearly stated that he is no longer interested in organizing a
      second search and that he was also no longer interested in recieving
      corrispondence about it. He also wished SB good luck in spite of our
      differences so kudos to him. Thanks.

      As for why all the k values, I don't think I need to justify this. I think a
      better way to look at it is to ask "why does one person deserve their own k
      value? why can't they share?" as Phil and others have said, it's not just
      about production, but I think it's great to see hundreds of people using the
      best tool possible for a job as opposed to 6 people limiting the effectiveness
      of a mass effort. there is no reason the participants in the other search
      couldn't use SB but they are so pationately jealous and upset that I doubt
      that can happen.

      if you can't tell, i'm a little sick of playing math politics. i'm especially
      sick of playing it with hostile outsiders who somehow think that sending me
      venomous emails will somehow influence me to do something. none of the emails
      have offered a single suggestion to guide me. everyone who actually has
      written me to complain (i think 3 emails) refuses to even suggest what i
      should do. i have asked everyone who writes me if they have advice for me on
      what i should do... no one has offered any. even they know that I did the best
      thing under the circumstances after they know what those circumstances were.

      honestly, i'm a nice guy. i'm a sociable guy. if you have concerns, don't post
      about SB's shortcomings on other forums... write me. just send me a kind email
      asking me why i did something the way i did and i'll tell you exactly what the
      circumstances were that lead to my discission. if one of the former searchers
      whats to reserve a range of n for a given k, i'd be happy to talk with them
      and possibly organize that now that Keller can't. if you have other ideas that
      you think would be good, please share them with me.

      please spread my message to yahoo or anywhere else where there is a
      misunderstanding. i want to see these people use their energies to start
      making postive suggestions to help guide SB.



      __________________________________________________
      Virus checked by MessageLabs Virus Control Centre.
    • Ken Davis
      Hi All, I must say that it distresses me greatly to see such rancour amongst such great minds. I never realised that people were reserving( proclaiming
      Message 34 of 34 , Dec 2, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi All,
        I must say that it distresses me greatly to see such rancour amongst
        such great minds.
        I never realised that people were reserving( proclaiming exclusive
        right to) ranges of k's, n's or whatever.
        I thought the idea was to make it known that you were searching a
        particular area so that other people didn't waste CPU cycles redoing
        work.
        My decision to select n!11-1 to search based on the fact that it was
        marked as free was not so much that it was marked as free but that I
        was sure that I wasn't redoing someone elses work.
        With !n there are an infinite number of choices so I didn't have to
        tread on any toes.
        With only 17 sierpinski K available, and as is obvious from SOB,
        100's of willing searchers how could we expect one person to be able
        to search one K for what could be years.
        Again I state I am currently searching n!11-1 (n=1-200000) n!11+1 (1-
        200000) and n!2(30000-50000). I have 13 machines searching various
        ranges some top-down but intend to complete all 3 ranges (including
        redoing 35K of numbers which were done with my p4). If somone thinks
        it is worth their time also tesing within theses ranges the so be it.
        I DON'T own them, there just numbers!
        cheers
        Ken
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.