1995-02-13 - Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions

Header Data

From: jrochkin@cs.oberlin.edu (Jonathan Rochkind)
To: Matt Blaze <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 8bf131ce07af1e507ac01c711c48ba9b8b08c2c0ce16a086dcdacdf87c9f98a7
Message ID: <ab64660a03021004491e@[132.162.201.201]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-13 01:26:36 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 17:26:36 PST

Raw message

From: jrochkin@cs.oberlin.edu (Jonathan Rochkind)
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 17:26:36 PST
To: Matt Blaze <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions
Message-ID: <ab64660a03021004491e@[132.162.201.201]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 8:19 PM 02/12/95, Matt Blaze wrote:
>No it hasn't.  Factoring is believed to be hard, but no one has ever
>shown it to be NP-hard (let alone NP complete).

Woops.  Thanks for the correction, and thanks to everyone else who managed
to correct me within only minutes after I made the mistake.  :)  You can
all stop sending me mail now.

[Moral of the story: don't make a math error on the cypherpunks list.]







Thread