Re: Topicality: James Harris and surrogate factoring (vote)

From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich_at_math.okstate.edu)
Date: 04/09/05 

Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 08:19:24 -0500

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:38:22 +0300, Juuso Hukkanen
<juuso929@tele3d.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:48:29 +0300, Juuso Hukkanen
><juuso929@tele3d.net> wrote:
>
>The vote is over - no votes cast (although one suggestion to buy a
>vote)
>
>Because the voting went even no decisions can be made. However I'll
>try to conclude what was or could have or should have been said.
>
>Harris said that he will in the future be more thoughtful and pay more
>attention to the free advices he is given by the group. After all he
>recognizes that he needs and uses lots of highly skilled and valuable
>human resources. He also said to be thankful for all assistance
>donated for free b those who decide to help him.

He said all that? Where? I missed it.

_When_ did he say that? As of April 8 he was still calling us
liars.

>Importantly James
>also promised that he will in the future behave better in all news
>groups, that especially meaning reading all replies to the threads he
>has started. He also indicated be willing to not start more than one
>SF thread per day - ever. Quite unexpectedly James also made a promise
>to sometimes try to help others i.e. post replies to other threads -
>first such would be seen already during this weekend.
>
>Regulars on NG's did mention that in the past their most serious
>concern had been the neglecting of their carefully thought answers and
>instructions. That ignorance in the past may have been the main reason
>behind excessive use of potentially insulting expressions. Many of the
>regulars underlined any ones right to try to achieve seemingly
>impossible goals. Surprisingly some regulars found to have been self
>educated by James or while investigating the surrogate factoring. Good
>writing skills of James Harris were also highly valuated as in many of
>the replies. Some regulars made convincing promises of trying not to
>attack James with useless no-educating terms - "after all it is not
>likely that the quality of surrogate factoring will improve by
>insulting it."
>
>Both parties did indicate potential for improved future co-operation.
>James self suggested that in case he would constantly violate the
>rules of co-operation the regulars would have rightfully the right to
>disrupt the SF discussion in sci.math and sci.crypt any way they can,
>for example by increasing the noise level in SF discussion by posting
>replies containing texts in monk Latin - or the regulars might decide
>by popular vote to declare him and surrogate factoring off topic. And
>in that case James promised to obey and take development of surrogate
>factoring elsewhere. Regulars did thank James for allowing them to
>participate in reweaving and developing of surrogate factoring.
>Interestingly all regulars individually promised that insulting would
>not become the main theme in their replies regarding surrogate
>factoring.

What? I didn't see anyone promise this.

I'm a regular, and I _know_ that I made no such promise.

Are you making all of this up, or is that sentence the only
part that you invented?

>Regulars also thank James for trusting to them the power of
>collectively asking James to leave.
>
>Thanks to all who participated, with words or thoughts.
>
>Well, that's about it, bye.
>
>Juuso

************************

David C. Ullrich

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Topicality: James Harris and surrogate factoring (vote)
    ... The vote is over - no votes cast (although one suggestion to buy a ... Importantly James ... Regulars on NG's did mention that in the past their most serious ... educated by James or while investigating the surrogate factoring. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Topicality: James Harris and surrogate factoring (vote)
    ... >>Both parties did indicate potential for improved future co-operation. ... >>rules of co-operation the regulars would have rightfully the right to ... >>by popular vote to declare him and surrogate factoring off topic. ... >>in that case James promised to obey and take development of surrogate ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: JSH: Finally useful theory?
    ... James can't do real damage ... sci.math regulars look forward to his off-the-wall rants. ... and produce an interesting integer factorization using it, ... certainly leave sci.crypt on replies. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: JSH: Contradictory behavior, issue of math fraud
    ... In its current version surrogate factoring is too slow to be ... TWICE AS SLOW AS RANDOM GUESSING. ... Some of the iterations of James' method are better than ... suggestion fewer values of n have to be tried before hitting a factor. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: JSH: What is surrogate factoring? Once more.
    ... Sieve as well as James' method. ... If his algorithm could force x^2 = y^2 mod T in a high ... his surrogate factoring method rarely results ... where k and n are nonzero integers ...
    (sci.math)