Distributed.net Forum IRC Logs 111
acidblood writes "The distributed.net forum held up in SlashNET today has just finished! Lots of questions regarding stats, future projects and other subjects were answered. A log of the conversation is available here. Thanks to everybody who participated!"
Does anyone read logs like this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Does anyone read logs like this? (Score:1)
Having said that, I agree with you: it would be great if they would put up a HTML-ised version that wouldn't give the reader a severe migraine.
Re:Does anyone read logs like this? (Score:1)
Isn't there some more readable way to generate an IRC log?
Sure there is- just whip up a quick Perl script that HTMLzies it, including color coding and whatever. Even I could write such a script fairly quickly, and I'm not a very good Perl coder...
Re:Does anyone read logs like this? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Does anyone read logs like this? (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, run it through my irc2html script [jwz.org].
Re:Does anyone read logs like this? (Score:1)
Read an unoptimized .txt file at 5:30AM.... (Score:1)
I feel like my eyes are pointing in opposite directions now.
My favorite part (Score:4, Funny)
[19:20:41] * bwilson pets the cow
Seriously, it's in there.
Re:My favorite part (Score:1)
[17:10:47] (Famous quote: http://bash.org/?6699)
[17:12:14] Lazy asks: How comes it took so much time between the key is found and the message of end (more than 2 months)
[17:12:50] there are two parts to this answer.
[17:13:09] The first portion of the delay was entirely our fault, and we're quite embarassed by it.
[17:13:52] It simply took us a month to notice that the key had arrived. On the keymaster there is a success.log which, in past projects, sits at 0 bytes until the day the winning key arrives.
[17:14:44] however, with the rc5-64 project there exists a buggy version of the client which generates false-positives. Consequently, the success.log became huge and was constantly growing.
[17:15:16] As luck would have it, the subspace we started with was one higher than the subspace where the solution was actually found. Luck of the draw, but we'll blame it on dbaker anyway.
[17:34:16] 256 times more work does not mean 256 times as long working, after all.
[17:35:15] As the saying goes, "if brute force won't solve your problem, you aren't using enough"
[17:43:58] we came quite close to being deployed to a few thousand pay telephones but the person behind the scheme couldn't get management approval.
[18:09:55] stealth`` asks: Why does PowerPC's have higher keyrates than the x86, even if a faster x86 is compared to a slower PowerPC?
[18:11:04] G4 CPUs have some architectural features very suited for RC5.
[18:11:20] koremore asks: To add to that, why do AMD processors give better keyrates than Intel ones?
[18:11:36] First, in the fastest cores, all processing is done in the vector unit of the chip (Altivec).
[18:12:07] Intel and AMD CPUs do have integer vector units (SSE2 and MMX), but they're less suited to RC5 than Altivec for two main reasons:
[18:13:09] More registers available (32 in the PowerPC versus 8 in MMX and SSE2), plus 128-bit wide registers (MMX is only 64-bit wide), and the existence of a hardware vector rotate instruction in Altivec, which isn't available in MMX and SSE2.
The whole thing is still worth a read though
AMD Rocks (Score:1)
I just LOVE my AMD...
More readable version (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.slashnet.org/forums/DCTI-200209
A more clickable version (Score:4, Informative)
Re:A more clickable version (Score:1)
Re:Obsolete (Score:2)
However, the current RSA Secret Key Challenges have, indeed, fixed machine word size at 32 bits and will not benefit from 64-bit processors.
Re:Privacy issue ? (Score:5, Insightful)
DCC is a semi private protocol,
Re:Privacy issue ? (Score:1)
Unlikely they'll finish rc5-72 (Score:1)
keys/sec for a typical CPU of the project
times
number of participants
times time spent (seconds).
As for the first we have Moore's law, which will probably continue to be accurate for some years to go. So that's a very good thing for d.net. Unfortunately the number of active participants isn't growing, and may well start to diminish with a timeframe as this. And that leaves time spent to get us there.
Rc5-72 is basicly just doing rc5-64 over again. There's no novelty value, no sense of accomplishment. It's just the same again, but 256 times bigger. I think people will change to other more instantly gratifying projects. SETI has a very pretty graphical client, public nterest and it's something new if you've been at d.net for 5 years.
In 10-20 years when Moore has made computers fast enough, that this project is accomplishable, there will be noone left to work at it.
rc5-72/ogr25 or slow-SETI@home client? (Score:1)
Any bets on how long RC5-72 will take? (Score:2)
* How many people are patient enough to wait that long for the job to finish? D.net has already lost a lot of geeks to the flashier projects like SETI, and most people just don't have the attention span to complete a long project without some periodic rewards along the way.
* What will it prove when they finally complete their task? If it takes thousands of computers over a decade to crack the code, are you REALLY going to be able to convince anyone that code isn't secure enough for basic data encryption? Sure, some paranoid government folks might panic, but the general public really isn't going to care.
Re:Any bets on how long RC5-72 will take? (Score:2)
I don't know about where you live but very few of the "general public" really gave a damn about the RC5-64 project... Not exactly something that lead the news in the typical area.
I doubt the "average" computer user thinks about the security of their data beyond the vague "evil hackers might get my AOL account" mindset.
That said, at the current rate, RC5-72 should take less time than the estimated completion time of RC5-64. (figure rc5-64 started 4+ years ago when the PII was the hottest thing around and clock speeds increased by tens, not by hundreds, of MHz)
Re:Any bets on how long RC5-72 will take? (Score:2)
This is a good time to use fold(1) (Score:2)
NAME
fold - fold long lines for finite width output device
SYNOPSIS
fold [-bs] [-w width] [file
DESCRIPTION
The fold utility is a filter which folds the contents of the specified files, or the standard input if no files are specified, breaking the lines to have a maximum of 80 columns.
The options are as follows:
-b Count width in bytes rather than column positions.
-s Fold line after the last blank character within the
first width column positions (or bytes).
-w width
Specify a line width to use instead of the default 80
columns. Width should be a multiple of 8 if tabs are
present, or the tabs should be expanded using expand(1)
before using fold.
Questions log (Score:1)
HTML Log (Score:3, Informative)
July (Score:2)
Last Post! (Score:1)
it is of no avail to threaten them with death.
If men live in constant fear of dying,
And if breaking the law means a man will be killed,
Who will dare to break the law?
There is always an official executioner.
If you try to take his place,
It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood.
If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter,
you will only hurt your hand.
-- Tao Te Ching, "Lao Tsu, #74"
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...