Yeah I understand, not to mention there is another topic too. But yeah as suggestion, checking the topic's first post is generally a good idea in some cases. Other times it isn't because it is not updated, but some authors update the main info there.

I think it should also be a small range that a server assigns you at a time. Running nonstop on my computer http://ourl.ca/9218/175045 with four instances it would take me four days to get through a 32 bit range on the C# version. For the asm version I am expecting about twelve hours on my system.

How many did SirCmpwn's program went through in the same amount of time compared to yours?

Also, from what I gather, Calc84maniac rewrote his program in assembly, but I could be wrong.

I don't know if this has already been asked, but why not write it in x86 asm or C?

Yes, it has been suggested by myself on page 6, and such a TF program was even written and published on Omnimaga, by Tribal and myself, months ago

phenomist, ECM is only good for finding small factors. It's roughly as extremely unlikely to find a 512-bit factor as TF is... IOW, you too are wasting your CPU time.


I stand corrected, I failed to communicate in my previous post, on page 6. That people make a bad independent reinvention of the wheel, without having consulted the background contained in other previous topics (or understood it, as DJ is arguing - I disagree, see below), and make everyone waste time (CPU time or explanation time) was no valid reason for the TL;DR part. Again, this is no excuse, but if some big names in the integer factoring had commented on the topic, now that would have been bashing, I can tell you... Although they'd probably have chosen to completely ignore 1) anyone trying to TF a RSA key and 2) the misguided waste of CPU time due to the sub-par implementation we're talking about here.
It's sad to see people focusing on several words at the end of a post containing > 90% of useful content (I could just have posted the TL;DR part, Kofler's style - you know that he's less patient than I am). It's sad to see that they seem to keep working in the wrong direction (the C# program) or reimplementing the wheel yet another time (for the fifth time in two days: on the Omnimaga forum, there's already a C program started by Tribal and optimized by myself, with manual resume support, I explicitly mentioned it in my previous post - so there was nothing to understand, just use the program) - i.e. I totally failed, because my post has had the opposite of the intended effect.

Anyhow, it's probably the last time I'm trying to help on Omnimaga wrt. factorization of the Nspire keys. I've already spent too much time trying to explain things. I'm aware that not everybody reads everything on Omnimaga - for one, I don't - but I really feel I've wasted my time.


BTW, could someone explain me how I attempted to start a language war by pointing the well-known, common sense fact that C#, and other languages of the same class, are not the best fit for heavy number computation tasks ? That might help me for the next time I'm participating in a discussion here.

Nope, I did not miss the "While a better program is worked on" part. But the thing is, a better program than this one did already exist, although nobody seemed to remember, and, as I reminded, I have worked on it.
And z80man, I did provide reasons for why there were better fits than C# or languages or the same class
Also, note that I haven't written that there wasn't any way to do a better TF program than the existing program that Tribal and I worked on

EDIT: at z80man's request, adding link to the topic containing the GMP-based C implementation made by Tribal and I: http://ourl.ca/6236 / http://www.omnimaga.org/index.php?action=topicattach;topic=3639 .


As I already wrote on IRC and above, I don't think that my warning is undeserved. It was, however, unfair, insulting (even slanderous ?) that a number of you vilified me for not having worked on better TF'ing programs (despite my explicit mention, in that very post, that I did !)... This is why my first reaction on IRC, this morning, was "Um, are you nuts ?".
We're in a situation where both "you" (the participants to the topic) and me feel doubly insulted. And as AOC posted after the initial version of my post, let's calm down. On my side, I've already posted my apologies.

As a computer scientist and electrical engineer with two degrees and two more in progress, I completely back Lionel on this.  The state-of-the-art involves research labs with millions of dollars of funding and massive superclusters working on this problem; your approach is naive and lacks their experience (no offense, that's the fact; naive in its computer science definition: "taking the most apparent route, which is often the least optimized").  To put it harshly and bluntly, if teams with dozens or hundreds of years of research experience between them have shown this problem to be prohibitive with large clusters and extremely well-written C code, I'm afraid that an amateur implementation in C# is not going to cut it.  I think it was pretty clear that Lionel was looking out for your best interests and trying to save you frustration, electricity, and computer load.  His post was well-written, knowledgeable, and I think those who read it in its entirety should have taken no offense from it.  Regarding the language issue, the speed of C# due to overhead compared with well-written C is a well-documented academic fact.

Cheers.

I am hoping that Lionel's method of factoring the key will be implemented in the ASM version or that his own program will be used, if people can actually find it in the 3 threads.

Well, DJ, I provided a direct link to the source code in my previous post
The topic is http://ourl.ca/6236 , and the attachments are http://www.omnimaga.org/index.php?action=topicattach;topic=3639 . And maybe admins have a quick way to find the post corresponding to a given attachment ?
Quoting myself:

note that I haven't written that there wasn't any way to do a better TF program than the existing program that Tribal and I worked on

I know of the algorithm you've posted - but it goes for both myself and yourselves
On the one side, there are two improper words in the "TL;DR" summary of my post, for which I apologized.
On the other side, there's a groundless personal attack, sent by some of you - among which some moderators - against me. I have actually spent some of my free time working on something to help with TF'ing the Nspire key - unlike most of those who posted that attack and down-rated my post.
So, please apologize on your side, and let's go forward together. Thanks in advance

Anyway I'm sorry for the personal attacks if I made any. I guess I was kinda frustrated at the last part of the post then later how this matter was brought up on another IRC channel (I do not know the intention behind this) that had nothing to do with Omni, and when I am angry I tend to say things I would not say normally. You are free to rate down my posts if they contain any.

ACK. Let's move forward together then

I'm not sure I'm in a position where down-rating your posts wouldn't be considered rude
But yeah, for example, "but so far you contributed no code for a better RSA key factorer program" and "If people here had the experience to write a better factoring/whatever algorithm in the way Lionel suggested and in ASM, I am sure it would've been done long ago", and "and more like you are offering your help", as replies to a message that contains an explicit mention (even though no direct link) of such code of mine (though as I also mentioned, I did not fully write it myself), was very rude