From: “James A. Tunnicliffe” <tunny@Inference.COM>
To: cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Message Hash: 899d24765e1e50b7bacec8eca6c32f64b4d48b53843460ab080745871a2990ab
Message ID: <304DB3A8@smtp-pc>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-09-06 14:49:18 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Sep 95 07:49:18 PDT
From: "James A. Tunnicliffe" <tunny@Inference.COM>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 95 07:49:18 PDT
To: cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: RE: Equinox/cypherpunks/www
Message-ID: <304DB3A8@smtp-pc>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
> Anyone that missed or was unable to get the UK TV programme Equinox
> might like to take a look at:
>
>
http://www.cityscape.co.uk/channel4/big_bytes/cybersecrecy/cyber000.html
>
> - Andy
Thanks for the pointer. I was reading through their nicely
organized gentle introduction to basic concepts, when I nearly
sprayed coffee all over my monitor from laughing so hard at
the following gaffe:
"...most modern codes rely on the intractable mathematical
problem of 'factorisation'. This is the process of trying to
find the two prime factors that, multiplied together, would
give you a third prime number. [JT: Yes, I'd call that an
intractable problem, all right.] For example, if you take
3337 - a prime number (i.e. a number that has precisely two
divisors) - how would you find its two prime factors? (They
are, in fact, 47 and 71.)"
A little unclear on that "prime" thing, it sounds like... :-)
- Tunny
______________________________________________________________________
James A. Tunnicliffe | WWWeb: http://www.inference.com/~tunny
Inference Corporation | PGP Fingerprint: CA 23 E2 F3 AC 2D 0C 77
tunny@Inference.com | <--finger for key 36 07 D9 33 3D 32 53 9C
======================================================================
Return to September 1995
Return to ““James A. Tunnicliffe” <tunny@Inference.COM>”
1995-09-06 (Wed, 6 Sep 95 07:49:18 PDT) - RE: Equinox/cypherpunks/www - “James A. Tunnicliffe” <tunny@Inference.COM>