[seqfan] Re: nice base-dependent sequence

[zak seidov]

agree
zak

--- On Sat, 5/29/10, franktaw at netscape.net <franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:

> From: franktaw at netscape.net <franktaw at netscape.net>
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: nice base-dependent sequence
> To: seqfan at list.seqfan.eu
> Date: Saturday, May 29, 2010, 5:36 AM
> I don't think the "hard" keyword
> should be given just because the known 
> algorithms are all slow. The sequence should be provably
> hard, or at 
> least there should be some good evidence for its difficulty
> (i.e., 
> factorization).
> 
> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans Havermann <pxp at rogers.com>
> 
> > Anyone care to produce a b-file?
> 
> I think this will be a tough road. Perhaps the sequence
> even deserves
> a "hard". Term #38 is 11525580.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>