Posts that seem less than useless, or something like that

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Why should I? In my first response to you I gave a very polite and very reasonable request: specify the input & output formats.

If you can't be bothered doing YOUR homework, why should ANYONE help?

It seems to me that considering alternate interpretations of a post that's not rigorously clear is part of the homework involved in deciding how to respond. If you can't be bothered doing that, perhaps it would be better to leave the responding to others who can.

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Are you perhaps not a native English speaker?

I asked for a definition of the INPUT FORMATS.

Just as with shouting, use of uppercase letters does not make English words clearer.

If you suspect that the poster is not a native English speaker, try using your intellect to find a better way to communicate your meaning, or understand his meaning ... or, perhaps best, leave that to other folks who are willing to "bother" doing that sort of homework.

Surely your intellect is wasted when trying to do communication tasks for which other forum members are better suited and have a better record of success. I recommend specializing in what you're good at doing, not trying to communicate with newbies.

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

I'm getting tired of this.

No wonder. You're trying to do something that for over a decade has been evidently much more difficult and less successful for you than for several other forum members to accomplish: communication with newbies.

You seem to fail to understand that I am one of the leading experts concerning these algorithms.

(* snort *) He has no reason to be expected to understand that.

Can't you even be bothered to take two minutes to Google my name?

You expect some newbie to Google your name? (* snort *)

First of all, there's the fact that most forum nyms are not real names. That yours has two initials or that it may look more like a real name than other nyms to some folks is not some obvious hint that the poster to whom you're responding should necessarily Google it.

Secondly, your expectation of name-Googling is ... hubristic.

I already told you once that I did not need the math explained, but you found it necessary to do so again.

You've been told many times, over several years, that you have no particular talent for communicating with newbies ... yet you still not only keep trying but also keep failing.

IF a newbie actually knew of that history, might he not take your complaint of "already told you once" as self-deprecating humor rather than sincere rebuke? (Of course, self-deprecation isn't quite consistent with the rest of your responses, but he might overestimate your range in that regard.)

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

It would be helpful to let people know that English is not your native language in the beginning. It would allow us to make more liberal interpretation of your writing, rather than a literal interpretation.

It would've been even more helpful, and saved time and trouble, for you to have given due consideration to that possibility when you first realized that the poster's language was non-rigorous. Again, that's reason for you to leave the task of communicating with newbies to other, more-skilled (in that regard) forum members.

It would allow us to make more liberal interpretation of your writing, rather than a literal interpretation.

Mr. Silverman, for other members of this forum, considering the possibility of a non-native-English poster would not have required explicit declaration by the poster. They would have automatically considered that possibility when they had read the OP, and incorporated that into their responses from the very beginning.

(Which is why I asked the question in the first place)

Your requirement of an explicit declaration by the poster is a dead giveaway that you lack natural talent for helpfully responding to newbie posts in this forum. Many other qualified responders in this forum would have tailored their responses for that possibility from the very start, without the waste of time and words that your requirement entails for you.

- - -

If you were, first, to allow other forum members to establish communication, and eventually work out a rigorous definition of the OP's problem, and then, only after that had been accomplished, to lend your unquestioned mathematical expertise to the discussion where necessary and effective, you'd:

a) save yourself a lot of work and frustration,

b) allow our forum's collective response to newbie inquiries to be more efficient, and

c) stop reinforcing your local reputation as a blunderer in an area where you lack natural talent.

[Batalov]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

c) stop reinforcing your local reputation as a blunderer in an area where you lack natural talent.

There it is -- an important lesson! For anyone, really.

[jasonp]

No need for rancor here, the discussion is winding down.

OP: Note that for a 128-bit DLP, if the size of the group order q is significantly smaller than 128 bits, you could also use Pollard's rho or kangaroo methods without having to resort to the number field sieve.

[BudgieJane]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

You seem to fail to understand that I am one of the leading experts
concerning these algorithms.

Then perhaps you'd like to take a look at the Wikipedia page, and sort it out.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

You've been told many times, over several years, that you have no particular talent for communicating with newbies ... yet you still not only keep trying but also keep failing.

Only within your feeble intellect.

c) stop reinforcing your local reputation as a blunderer in an area where you lack natural talent.

My premise is that I am dealing with adults, and not children.
I tell things like they are. If my bluntness is offensive, then I suggest
you leave. This is the real world.

You seem unable to talk intelligently to anyone who is more knowledgeable than you.
Your repeated arguments and diatribes with Ernst mirror the ones you have with me.

The failing that you see is only in your mind.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Only within your feeble intellect.

...

You seem unable to talk intelligently to anyone who is more knowledgeable than you. Your repeated arguments and diatribes with Ernst mirror the ones you have with me.

The failing that you see is only in your mind.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by xkyve

I recommend closing the topic. The problem has been solved.

Agreed. But I was not the one who introduced deliberate taunts into the
conversation.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by flagrantflowers

Unfortunately we only have PRP tests completed up to M(2M) so going beyond that range doesn't make sense as I would be including mostly candidates without a PRP result (positive or negative).

All I'm saying is the percent of exponents with a positive PRP result and having more than three factors is a very large portion of positive tests. Despite the fact that there are much more numbers with one factor.

I'm not trying to say that this means anything. I'm trying to say that this is functionally what the odds are on the tests done to date. This is obviously from this sample set and doesn't, ideally, represent the population of all <M(2M).

I don't pretend to understand the underlying factor theorems.

Trying to discuss things that one does not understand just makes one
look stupid. STOP.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Trying to discuss things that one does not understand just makes one
look stupid. STOP.

Were you born obnoxious or do you have to work at it everyday?

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by Gordon

Were you born obnoxious or do you have to work at it everyday?

Were you born a moron or do you have to work at it?

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Were you born a moron or do you have to work at it?

Remind me again how many Mersenne primes you have found

I have a nice list of all your more stupid posts going back over 10 years, might now be coming around time to remind everyone just what a jerk you are...