> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >I can't believe this. I looked and there are 35 people that
> >have been hoodwinked into this effort (not that RC5 seems
> >that much more justifiable), but at least RC5 is guaranteed
> >to produce a result (if it gets enough computers/time), while
> >SETI@HOME never will.
> Indeed. As an almost complete non-believer in extraterrestrial intelligence,
> I have little doubt that seti@home will find absolutely no signals from them.
> However, until we look we can't be sure; perhaps we've been lucky (or unlucky!)
> enough to reach this level within a few decades of a similar society a few
> tens of light years away and will find them, but if not we'll at least know
> that there's no-one at that level out there at this time. That is, of itself,
> a worthwhile justification for running the software on one of my PCs rather
> than yet another crypto-crack.
Even if you don't think this will work, its still a more interesting screen saver than any other I've used...
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael S. Lorrey Owner, Lorrey Systems http://www.lorrey.com ArtLocate.Com http://www.artlocate.com Director, Grafton County Fish & Game Assoc. http://www.lorrey.com/gcfga/ Member, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Member, National Rifle Association http://www.nra.org "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils." - General John Stark