RE: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Sixteen or Bust
- 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.
- 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
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!