Paul Missman wrote: > I know that this might be earth shattering news for you, > but there is no such thing as "poaching".
I think that folks who've been following the poaching discussion from the beginning know that there is indeed such a thing, and what it is. But let me post a refresher for the sake of newcomers. (Sayyy ... this ought to be in the PrimeNet FAQ! I'll volunteer to write it up as such, once the discussion has proceeded to the point where it seems that we have sound definitions.) In the context of GIMPS/PrimeNet, "poach" is used by analogy to certain more widespread uses of the verb. >From Webster's Third New International Dictionary [the square-bracketed words are expansions of the dictionary's abbreviations]: "poach /"/ [verb] ... 3a: to trespass on (a field [poach]ed too frequently by the amateur) -- often used with _on_ or _upon_ (what happens to a poet when he [poach]es upon a novelist's preserves -- Virginia Woolf) b: to take (game or fish) by illegal methods ... [verb intransitive] ... 3: to trepass for the purpose of stealing game : take game or fish illegally (had taken to [poach]ing as a means of supplying fresh meat for the table -- H.D.Quillin) 4: to play a ball in a racket game that should normally be played by one's partner" In GIMPS/PrimeNet, what is being trespassed upon is an exclusive assignment by GIMPS (represented by George Woltman) or by PrimeNet to L-L test a specific Mersenne number for primality. Since GIMPS/PrimeNet is not a government entity, instead of laws we have rules, so instead of "illegal" we mean "in violation of the established rules for assignments". Our "preserves" are the GIMPS/PrimeNet assignments. Our "game or fish" is the privilege to be the exclusive tester of the specific Mersenne number which has been assigned. That privilege includes the right to be the first person to know the result of a first-time Lucas-Lehmer primality test, and, if that result is that the number is prime, the right to be designated as the discoverer of that particular Mersenne prime. The latter right is of considerable importance and weight within the world of mathematics, and thus is deemed to have a high value, not at all trivial, in our context. For doublechecking assignments, the privilege associated with an exclusive GIMPS or PrimeNet assignment includes the right to be the first person to know the result of a doublechecking Lucas-Lehmer primality test, and, if that result is that the number is prime, the right to be designated as the discoverer of that particular Mersenne prime if it turns out that the first-time result of nonprimality was incorrect. Also, the GIMPS/PrimeNet assignment system can be considered analogous to rules for determining which partner in a racket game is to be the one to play a ball. > Neither GIMPS or PrimeNet have any license to these > numbers, But they have "rules of the game", and poaching is a violation of those rules. The GIMPS/PrimeNEt assignment system was established for at least these reasons: (a) to make work on Mersenne numbers efficient by avoiding needless duplication of effort, and (b) to provide world-wide incentive for people to participate by establishing the privileges listed above. Poaching works against those goals. Pretending that GIMPS/Primenet poaching concerns the laws of a governmental entity, or that governmental legality is relevant to our discussion would be a "straw man" type of argument. > nor are they the only entities testing large numbers for > primality. They _are_ the established clearinghouse for testing _Mersenne_ numbers for primality. The "M" in GIMPS stands for "Mersenne". Neither GIMPS nor PrimeNet attempts to make assignments for any other category of number. > If my sister reads from her math book a method of > testing large primes, knows nothing of PrimeNet or > GIMPS, tests the numbers on her home computer, and > finds a large prime, she is gonna publish it. ... and (provided the number were a Mersenne prime in particular) she would not be deemed to have "poached" if she did so in ignorance of GIMPS and Primenet. But the poachers with which this discussion is concerned are those who _do_ know about the GIMPS/Primenet assignment system but nevertheless deliberately choose to violate its assignment rules. > She might choose to send any results to GIMPS, or not. Okay. > She might double check it using GIMPS provided software, > or not. If she did, it would weaken any claim of ignorance of the assignment system. > But for sure nobody has any reason to prevent her from > doing any of this. ... _if_ she genuinely was working outside GIMPS/PrimeNet and was not aware of the GIMPS/PrimeNet assignment system. > There simply is no real problem here that is begging for > solution. Some folks who _have_ followed this discussion and have participated in GIMPS a long time might like to pretend so. But, yes, there is a real problem here. Richard Woods _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
