From: JSH on
On Jul 3, 4:44 pm, "Sue San" <inva...(a)invalid.com> wrote:
> "JSH" <jst...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:a4d6f81d-3fff-43a2-bfc4-69b77e6d47c7(a)x18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 2, 8:12 pm, "Sue San" <inva...(a)invalid.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Mark Murray" <w.h.o...(a)example.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:4c2e3ddb$0$28006$db0fefd9(a)news.zen.co.uk...
>
> > > On 02/07/2010 04:44, MichaelW wrote:
> > >> To the governments of the world.
>
> > >> I have got sufficient details from the posting of one James Harris to
> > >> allow me to write code that breaks any and all encryption currently in
> > >> use. I have successfully hacked into the systems that control the US
> > >> nuclear arsenal. Please send one hundred billion dollars in small
> > >> unmarked bills to James Harris (currently residing in LA, California)
> > >> or I will start destroying your cities.
>
> > >> Have a nice day. Michael W.
>
> > > Michael,
>
> > > Before the evidence is lost forever, it must be noted the formidable
> > > nature of your correspondent:
>
> > >http://twitter.com/jstevhhas:
>
> > > <quote>
> > > the world has never seen a major discoverer like me. my job quite
> > > simply,
> > > is to push the entire human species--forward.
> > > </quote>
>
> >> > You saw it here first. Be very afraid.
>
> >> ckout more on his blog => this guy is out to lunch
> >> Who would spend the time to type in little messages like that and send it
> >> off into no-where land?
> >Yeah, wild.  What possibly could such a person think they're doing?
>
> >Thanks for the observation!  You're very observant.
>
> >James Harris
>
> at least in sci.math, sci.crypt it is posted in public and anyody can read
> it, Twitter ? it only goes to your fiends.

Twitter is more powerful than Usenet. Search on ANY search engine:
jstevh

Now re-think that position about only my friends.

My tweets pop up in the weirdest places. It's a MUCH BIGGER effect
than Usenet ever achieved.

I can just think something, tweet it, and start seeing things move
immediately.

It's freaking bizarre. Twitter is actually kind of scary powerful.

It is the most powerful leverage tool on planet earth.

No one yet knows the full limits of Twitter. It is the most powerful
thing out there right now.


James Harris
From: JSH on
On Jul 3, 4:48 pm, rossum <rossu...(a)coldmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 09:26:46 +0100, Mark Murray <w.h.o...(a)example.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> I DO try to clobber my own ideas.  And in this case finding that this
> >> approach is fatally flawed does not end much.
>
> >It would haved helped if this approach had been already eliminated at
> >the time of your first announcement, and included in your submission
> >to AoM. This would that you did your checking properly, rather than
> >rushing a half-baked idea out of the door.
>
> A valid point James.  It would be polite to withdraw your current
> paper to the AoM so as not to waste the reviewers' time.  Once you
> have fixed the problems you can consider whether or not to resubmit.
>
> rossum

What problems you idiot? I noted there are no problems. Attacks
currently are on the discrete log route which is NOT part of that
paper.

What's with you dweebs always wanting me to withdraw papers?

Can't even you see--mindless though you often appear to be--how
transparent that is?

I'm arguing over areas not covered in the paper submitted to the
Annals. The discrete log analysis is something that came after
submission.


James Harris
From: Joshua Cranmer on
On 07/03/2010 08:00 PM, JSH wrote:
> It's freaking bizarre. Twitter is actually kind of scary powerful.
>
> It is the most powerful leverage tool on planet earth.

Actually, it has been said that Twitter has an abysmal rate. One study
found (admittedly, it's a year old, but I've not seen any updates) that
Twitter has a retention rate of around 40%. I have also seen many
commentaries pointing out that Twitter's power is grossly overrated.

> No one yet knows the full limits of Twitter. It is the most powerful
> thing out there right now.

What about Facebook? The number of Facebook users dwarfs the number of
Twitter users by a very large ratio. As much as I might not personally
like it, it is undeniably much more widespread than Twitter.

--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
From: Mark Murray on
On 04/07/2010 01:02, JSH wrote:
>> A valid point James. It would be polite to withdraw your current
>> paper to the AoM so as not to waste the reviewers' time. Once you
>> have fixed the problems you can consider whether or not to resubmit.
>>
>> rossum
>
> What problems you idiot? I noted there are no problems. Attacks
> currently are on the discrete log route which is NOT part of that
> paper.

At the time of your submission, you hadn't heard of modular
exponentiation, discrete logarithms or the chinese remainder
theorem, instead claiming that your result was a new connection
betwen residues and factoring, when in fact, via DLs, this was
well known.

> What's with you dweebs always wanting me to withdraw papers?

We don't like to see you wasting the time of a professional
reviewer.

> Can't even you see--mindless though you often appear to be--how
> transparent that is?

No subterfuge, I assure you. Transparency is what this is
all about. We do think that paper is rubbish, we do think it
should be withdrawn, and we think it would be gracious of you
to do so yourself rather than waiting for a reviwer to tell
you that your work is old hat.

> I'm arguing over areas not covered in the paper submitted to the
> Annals. The discrete log analysis is something that came after
> submission.

Correct. Unfortunately, DLs are a fundamental part of your
so-called "discovery", so in order for your paper to have
any degree of academic honesty, you need to account for them
properly, and show that what you have is indeed novel. As
you have so far failed to do so, the alternative is to withdraw.

M
--
Mark "No Nickname" Murray
Notable nebbish, extreme generalist.
From: Ostap Bender on
On Jul 1, 8:19 pm, JSH <jst...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> NO ONE is to use said information for stock trading.  Or for any
> financial gain.  The money will just be taken back from you later
> anyway.

Too late. I already made $5.36 trading on your ideas. I can send you
half, though.

> Nations who get this message should simply go to procedures put in
> place for such an eventuality.  World will probably be on various
> stages of high alert, indefinitely.

The World is trembling at your feet, James. Please be gentle with us!