Re: provably hard PK cryptosystems

[Phil Fraering <pgf@acadian.net>]

On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Gary Howland wrote:

> I fail to see *any* (non educational) use for these DNA "computers", let
> alone a cryptographic use - sure, they may be massively parallel, but
> what's the big deal?  I can now perform a calculation a million times
> faster than I could yesterday? (something I personally doubt, but will
> agree to for sake of the argument).  I could get the same results
> writing a cycle stealing Internet java app, so what's all the fuss
> about?

It sounds to me like your argument abstracts thusly:

"Personally, I fail to see the point to the development of more powerful
computers, since I can always steal time from other people's current
technology computers."

One could make this statement about _all_ advances in processor
technology. And it boils down to this: you're not paying for it, so you
don't see the point in getting more bang for the buck. People who are
paying for it, and have neither the inclination nor the ability to steal,  
do see the point of getting more bang for the buck. And eventually even
you'll benefit, when you find yourself writing a java applet to freeload
processor time on someone else's DNA computer. Meanwhile, processor
technology will have advanced because many people went out and paid for
faster (Intel/PowerPC/PowerDNA/Whatever) CPU's. Not because you freeloaded
off of someone else. 

> --
> pub  1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22  Gary Howland <gary@systemics.com>
> Key fingerprint =  0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D  1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06
> 

Phil Fraering          The above is the opinion of neither my internet
pgf@acadian.net        service provider nor my employer.
318/261-9649           "Pinky, your brain waves are giving The Amazing    
                        Kreskin a pounding headache."