Server down?

[endless mike]

Unlike the Mersenne prime search, we only need to double check positive results. The time double-checking is better spent checking new numbers. For Mersenne primes, we want a complete list. For 17-or-bust, we only need to find a prime for each coefficient. If we get a false negative, no harm is done if we find a prime for that coefficient.

A false negative would mean a missed prime. Potentially wasted years of computing would count as harm in my book. That's the main reason I gave up on SOB and went back to GIMPS.

Consider a hypothetical k where the first prime is at n=100,000, and the second prime is at n=100,000,000. If you miss the first prime because of an undetected computation error, many years of unnecessary computing will be wasted searching for the second prime.