Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Fermat's Last Theorem apparently proven
Message-ID: <7502@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 20 Mar 88 06:17:52 GMT
References: <977@thumper.bellcore.com> <7440@brl-smoke.ARPA> <26797@linus.UUCP> <11288@duke.cs.duke.edu> <7738@alice.UUCP> <27072@linus.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11

In article <27072@linus.UUCP> bs@gauss.UUCP (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>Your understanding of algorithms and proof of their correctness is somewhat
>limited I would say. 

Hey, no need to insult Tom Duff, who is an extremely clever person.

I'm not sure why Bob seems to be so offended by this discussion,
which started with my remark to the effect that I didn't think a
proof of Fermat's lost theorem would have any more practical
consequences for cryptology than a proof of RH.  I still believe
that, even though RH does seem to be more relevant, but it isn't
worth getting nasty about.  I think there is a communication failure.