[rc5] New Win32 client available
nelsonl at cs.purdue.edu
Thu Jul 31 16:49:24 EDT 1997
I really think this is broken logic, if you're trying to say that we have
a significant head start or that the fact we have more machines means we
are cracking faster then why not say so? There client rate is still
faster, though there cracking effort may not be. I'm also not really sure
that the fact the two groups are duplicating effort is such a good thing,
in fact I think it is a bad thing. I don't think the point is to win the
contest as much as to break the code, hence it would be more benificail
for the different efforts to work together. Would it be possible to have a
master server that let different efforts grab huge key blocks? This would
allow the overall effort to be coordinated, while keeping meta-teams
working. (ie Bovine, cyberian, that other one I forget) That way you can
enjoy an arms race of sorts with client speeds, and even philosophies on
what to do with the money, while still doing the best thing for
On Thu, 31 Jul 1997, David McNett wrote:
> One thing to take into consideration is that at least every tenth block
> that the cyberian client completes is a block that has already been checked
> by the bovine effort. Therefore, when comparing client speeds, it's
> important to remember that you should multiply the cyberian client's rate
> by 0.9 in order to get the true comparison.
> I believe you'll find that this 10% wasted effort more than offsets the ~2%
> speed advantage that the cyberian client shows on a few platforms.
> Just keeping things in perspective, here. :)
> |David McNett |To ensure privacy and data integrity this message has|
> |nugget at slacker.com|been encrypted using dual rounds of ROT-13 encryption|
> |Birmingham, AL USA|Please encrypt all important correspondence with PGP!|
> To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at llamas.net with 'unsubscribe rc5' in the body.
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at llamas.net with 'unsubscribe rc5' in the body.
More information about the rc5