According to [url=https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/17/pi_world_record_challenged/]this article[/url], they used [url=http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/]y-cruncher[/url], the same app used for the 50 tn digit computation.

Had to check back at my emails because it's been so long since I last spoke with Thomas that I completely forgot he was still running this. :davieddy:

Yes, it was on y-cruncher, and he asked me for a lot of help months ago about this.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;585927]According to [url=https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/17/pi_world_record_challenged/]this article[/url], they used [url=http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/]y-cruncher[/url], the same app used for the 50 tn digit computation.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the link. An interesting read.

It appears they took a bet and didn't put RAID over their JBOD. I hope they weren't using a certain manufacturer who will remain nameless... Or, if they did, they were lucky... 9-)

Edit: [URL="https://www.trentonsystems.com/blog/jbod-vs-raid-what-are-the-differences"]Useful knowledge[/URL].

Edit2: Whoops... I just reread that article all the way to the bottom. While the knowledge is sound, they are a provider of JBOD kit. I have no affiliation.

So this is uh... not great.

Based on my email convo with Thomas (the guy in charge of the latest Pi computation), it looks like they did not verify the computation. Because when I asked about the BBP computation he was like, "what?!?"

If that's the case, then they have jumped the gun on announcing the record. I've kicked off my own BBP verification run which will end in about ~20 hours.

[QUOTE=Mysticial;586003]So this is uh... not great.

Based on my email convo with Thomas (the guy in charge of the latest Pi computation), it looks like they did not verify the computation. Because when I asked about the BBP computation he was like, "what?!?"

If that's the case, then they have jumped the gun on announcing the record. I've kicked off my own BBP verification run which will end in about ~20 hours.[/QUOTE]

Ian Cutress made a video, published today, where he said that it was not verified.
[YOUTUBE]s-Xma3SHHos[/YOUTUBE]

[QUOTE=Viliam Furik;586018]Ian Cutress made a video, published today, where he said that it was not verified.[/QUOTE]

I'm not surprised Ian noticed. He's been eyeing this record for a while now and knows all the in-and-outs of it. He just needs to source the storage for it before he can make a run for the record.

And it looks like there are at least [I]some[/I] sites that aren't ready to recognize the record yet. Not sure if they also noticed the lack of verification or if they're waiting for me to update the list on numberworld.org.

[QUOTE=Mysticial;586031]I'm not surprised Ian noticed. He's been eyeing this record for a while now and knows all the in-and-outs of it. He just needs to source the storage for it before he can make a run for the record.[/QUOTE]

I don't know the history of this. But... From my perspective...

Calculating N digits of something known is just a matter of money and time.

Every time a record is announced, it just takes another team to run a longer job to beat it.

It's a bit like auto-gratification. But without the euphoria.

Verification is done and it matches. So the screw up fortunately didn't turn out to be.

[QUOTE=chalsall;586034]I don't know the history of this...[/QUOTE]
[URL]https://www.ams.org/publicoutreach/math-history/hap-6-pi.pdf[/URL]

Ok, now we have enough digits to solve a(20) :razz: :cmd:

[QUOTE=LaurV;586109]Ok, now we have enough digits to solve a(20) :razz: :cmd:[/QUOTE]

What is a(20)?