Re: Crypto and new computing strategies

[Jim choate <ravage@bga.com>]

> 
> 
> Jim choate writes:
>  > While I can understand the commen wisdom such QM type machines are
>  > not a threat to the present cyrpto-cracking horsepower race I must
>  > admit I don't agree with it. First, historicaly (and emotionaly on
>  > my part) I have a hard time taking the  premise that the status quo
>  > will stay the status quo. I have this belief that some bright
>  > person is going to come along and blow all our pipe dreams away. 
>  > It has happened before and it WILL happen again, especially when
>  > you consider the resources available to the government. 
> 
> Remember, however, that advances in technology benefit encryptors as
> well as codebreakers.  Unless the "bright person" comes along and
> proves P == NP, there's still opportunity to develop strong
> cryptosystems.  (Indeed, if a bright person comes along and proves
> that P != NP, then things look pretty good.)
> 
> --
> | GOOD TIME FOR MOVIE - GOING ||| Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>       |
> | TAKE TWA TO CAIRO.          ||| Tivoli Systems, Austin, TX:        |
> |     (actual fortune cookie) ||| "Like A Little Bit of Semi-Heaven" |
> 
The problem w/ the whole N - NP approach is that is assumes that the QM
model behaves as we would expect it to, it doesn't. I think this is one of
those assumptions that are better left un-made. I have worked w/ enough QM
projects throug UT and Discovery Hall (Dr. Turner and Dr. Prigogine) that
I am not comfortable assuming the QM world even cares about the N or NP
issues we are debating.