[RC5] Golomb Rulers (was "sexy" projects)
ZenCrawler at aol.com
Tue Mar 3 00:31:20 EST 1998
In a message dated 98-03-03 00:07:08 EST, you write:
>This seems like a Bad Thing(tm) I have a decent system with 32 MB of ram
>and X can take up to 20 or 30 (with lots of netscape windows) it seems
>like a very bad idea to have a client that would cause so much swapping
>and performance degradation.
The effort is based on AOL, what can you expect? The clients are
nice, but in comparison to the d.net setup, they're stone-age crude.
well I just noticed that I'm still only giving the program 11 megs of ram
space to upload the bit maps from the 23 bit map choose.dat file I downloaded.
It even takes the time to only upload how many bits of the file I told it to
upload. From what I can tell of this project it's only just begun to jump in
size of participants. the site where all new users of the client must go has
only recieved 600 or so hits. If you can't give up 11 megs of memory for an
application then you should brute force the solution using the gvant
implementation of the program not the garsp implementation ( which CLEARLY
isn't meant to be an unobtrusive idle process on low RAM machines ). Mark
Garry probably wasn't thinking about network and proxy access to databases of
stubs and stublet markers, ( these are like the blocks distributed.net hands
out for people new to the thread ), and as such didn't implement network
support for anonymous taking of the stubs.
Also something i've noticed from this project is that the files sent
back and forth are small and easily modified right now, and with the paranoia
of the distributed.net people about other people falsifying block completion /
time completed in numbers this may cause a problem if it's merely ported over
into d.nets current program model.
Yet another thing i've noticed is that cracking DES II was a pretty
useless goal except in the fact that it raised some money for charity. The
encryption program I use offers dual or triple DES encryption which would be
rather difficult to crack without a known block of text.
As per that last note on this thread: "The effort is based on AOL,
what can you expect? The clients are nice, but in comparison to the d.net
setup, they're stone-age crude."
note several things. 1 the project is relatively new. 2 there are NOT
22,000 participants in this yet, and 3 Stone age crude is what I call the
brute force method of crunching the decryption keysets that d.net used. 4.
there is a LOW RAM alternative that, of course, goes a bit slower. and 5. Do
we really need simple "flame AOL users any way I can" style oppinions on this?
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
More information about the rc5