On Friday 24 January 2003 02:27, Richard Woods wrote: > > Let's put it this way: Maybe you don't give a fig for fame, but > some of the rest of us do. A chance at real, honest-to-gosh > mathematical fame has a value not measurable in CPU years, but > poaching steals that. > So what we want is a declaration that in the event of a prime being found, kudos etc. goes to the official owner of the assignment, even if a poacher finishes first.
The only problem here is that I could make it almost certain that I would get the kudos for a prime discovery by grabbing a _very_ large batch of assignments, checking them in regularly but not actually doing any work on any of them, until a poacher finds the prime for me ... but that's cheating, too. I think perhaps what may be needed is a new "rule" that users who don't complete assignments in a reasonable period of time (say 1 year?) should lose the right to the assignment, even if they do check in regularly. This should discourage poaching by removing the motive, and also improve the quality of the work submitted - "random glitches" do occur; with run times much over one year, I would think it fairly likely that a "glitch" would lose you the chance of a prime discovery even if you had the right assignment. (What a sickener that would be!) > > > I might also point out that there is sufficient information in the > > other reports (particularly the hrf3 & lucas_v database files) to > > enable the poachers to be identified, > > Better read my proposal again. Its intent was to _PREVENT_ (not > perfectly, but to some extent) poaching, not identify it after-the-fact. Police forces can't _PREVENT_ crime, but they can discourage it. If you can identify the poachers, then you could ask them (politely or otherwise) to desist, or "name & shame" them. > > BTW, exactly which data fields in either the HRF3.TXT or LUCAS_V.TXT > file provide information about currently-assigned, in-progress, > incomplete assignments (which are the poachable ones)? The hrf3 & lucas_v database files identify those who have submitted results for each exponent (except when a factor has been found). So if you have had an assignment poached ... As you correctly point out, they don't contain direct pointers to poachable assignments - though, with a list of primes, a list of exponents in the factors database, a list of exponents in hrf3 & a list of exponents in lucas_v, you can fairly easily derive a list of the lowest exponents which are short of a LL test or double-check - these are in all probability assigned & therefore poachable. > I asked this > in the GIMPS forum, but haven't seen any answer there yet. So will > you please point out what I overlooked? Sorry, I don't read the forum. It's inconvenient & expensive for those of us that have pay-as-you-go dialup access; whilst I'm at work I simply don't have the time to mess with such things. There is no cable service within 40 miles of me, the nearest ADSL-enabled exchange is about the same distance away, satellite "broadband" is ferociously expensive & still depends on a dial-up line for outbound data; the density of population round here is such that there's almost no chance of a wireless mesh working, either. Regards Brian Beesley _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
