One of the two factors doe, in fact, have to be absolutely prime, the other simply needs to be relatively prime to that - though choosing another absolute prime is an easy shortcut to that.
A lot of the security of RSA falls out as a corollary of Fermat's little theorem:
a^(p-1)=1(modp)
For p prime.
I won't go into the details, but the short answer is, yes, absolutely prime is required.
But, from the Linux point of view, copyware is significant because it can serve to ease the transition from one OS to another. I bet most UNIX hackers, forced to use NT, end up installing a Bash clone and Xemacs. Otherwise, using the computer feels like you're wearing boxing gloves.
Too right. I'm stuck with NT for now... end result: I use cygwin and BASH for my filemanagement, Xemacs for editing, and Litestep for the shell (and to get rid of that bloody start bar). I have Focus follows mouse setup - I even went as far as getting a multidesktop program so I can do proper multiple virtual desktops (a feature I always liked in windowmanagers). I'm just disappointed that the port of RXVT to windows is a little buggy on NT.
The problem is, no matter how much you change to outward look and feel to make it usable, it's still windows (and crash happy) underneath. (sigh).
Photoshop pros:
1) I have spent years learning Photoshop. Whatever I need to do to an image, I can do it in Photoshop really, really quickly.
When I use GIMP, I get frustrated alot "Damn it! In Photoshop I could just do x - y - z and I'd be done by now!"
My time with graphic apps has generally been spread across a wide variety - Corel, Adobe, Paint Shop Pro, and GIMP mainly. When I use any of them I get occasionally frustrated "Damn it, I could do this in no time in (whatever I'm not using at the time)". It simply isn't true that Photoshop has everything GIMP has - I would suggest you just haven't used GIMP enough to understand where it really shines (and where photoshop really sucks). You have, of course, used photoshop enough to know where GIMP really sucks by comparison. get some more experience with GIMP, it will be worth it in the long run.
I still use different graphics apps for different jobs depending on what I want to do, because, in reality, no matter how good any one app is, the others are often better for _something_.
These days my time is split about 50/50 between GIMP and photoshop though.
Jedidiah
Re:What is nice about Opera (4\beta for Linux)?
on
Netscape 6 Vs. 4.7x
·
· Score: 1
I'm stuck on an NT box at work, and we default to Netscape here, but I gave that away ages ago. Opera for windows is IMHO the nicest windows browser I've found (and I have tried a few). It's fast, stable (well, compared to NS 4.75, but most things are pretty stable compared to that), and has a nice array of features. The only thing I hate is he MDI...
Slashdot Mirror
One of the two factors doe, in fact, have to be absolutely prime, the other simply needs to be relatively prime to that - though choosing another absolute prime is an easy shortcut to that.
A lot of the security of RSA falls out as a corollary of Fermat's little theorem:
a^(p-1)=1(modp)
For p prime.
I won't go into the details, but the short answer is, yes, absolutely prime is required.
Jedidiah
--
But, from the Linux point of view, copyware is significant because it can serve to ease the transition from one OS to another. I bet most UNIX hackers, forced to use NT, end up installing a Bash clone and Xemacs. Otherwise, using the computer feels like you're wearing boxing gloves.
... end result: I use cygwin and BASH for my filemanagement, Xemacs for editing, and Litestep for the shell (and to get rid of that bloody start bar). I have Focus follows mouse setup - I even went as far as getting a multidesktop program so I can do proper multiple virtual desktops (a feature I always liked in windowmanagers). I'm just disappointed that the port of RXVT to windows is a little buggy on NT.
Too right. I'm stuck with NT for now
The problem is, no matter how much you change to outward look and feel to make it usable, it's still windows (and crash happy) underneath. (sigh).
Jedidiah
--
Photoshop pros:
1) I have spent years learning Photoshop. Whatever I need to do to an image, I can do it in Photoshop really, really quickly.
When I use GIMP, I get frustrated alot "Damn it! In Photoshop I could just do x - y - z and I'd be done by now!"
My time with graphic apps has generally been spread across a wide variety - Corel, Adobe, Paint Shop Pro, and GIMP mainly. When I use any of them I get occasionally frustrated "Damn it, I could do this in no time in (whatever I'm not using at the time)". It simply isn't true that Photoshop has everything GIMP has - I would suggest you just haven't used GIMP enough to understand where it really shines (and where photoshop really sucks). You have, of course, used photoshop enough to know where GIMP really sucks by comparison. get some more experience with GIMP, it will be worth it in the long run.
I still use different graphics apps for different jobs depending on what I want to do, because, in reality, no matter how good any one app is, the others are often better for _something_.
These days my time is split about 50/50 between GIMP and photoshop though.
Jedidiah
I'm stuck on an NT box at work, and we default to Netscape here, but I gave that away ages ago. Opera for windows is IMHO the nicest windows browser I've found (and I have tried a few). It's fast, stable (well, compared to NS 4.75, but most things are pretty stable compared to that), and has a nice array of features. The only thing I hate is he MDI ...