What could possibly go wrong... ;)

[news18]

On Wed, 09 Oct 2019 12:04:43 +0000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

I think the current bet is on quantum computers simply becoming powerful
enough to adequately implement one of the solutions that use them.

It's still a long way from the being useful, but going from being able
to factorise 143 in 2012 to having one realise that 659 571s make
376,289 last year seems a decent rate of advancement to my uneducated
eye. Of course the key thing is that these computers find the answer in
only a few seconds.

No ned to look for quantum computing when there is surplus processing
power going to waste on disruptive events at commant (DDOD, etc) that
could be put to "good" use as another distributed computing problem, as
are a few volantary enrolled computers aimed as "scientific" analysis.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 10/10/2019 2:16 pm, news18 wrote:

On Wed, 09 Oct 2019 12:04:43 +0000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:


I think the current bet is on quantum computers simply becoming powerful
enough to adequately implement one of the solutions that use them.

It's still a long way from the being useful, but going from being able
to factorise 143 in 2012 to having one realise that 659 571s make
376,289 last year seems a decent rate of advancement to my uneducated
eye. Of course the key thing is that these computers find the answer in
only a few seconds.

No ned to look for quantum computing when there is surplus processing
power going to waste on disruptive events at commant (DDOD, etc) that
could be put to "good" use as another distributed computing problem, as
are a few volantary enrolled computers aimed as "scientific" analysis.

I looked into options when trying to figure out accessing the VPN that
Tesla uses to control my Powerwall (no progress made).

I think the factorising problem is so intractable that even using all
the conventional computing power in the world can't address it for the
currently recommended key length (2048 bits).

Sylvia.