Posts by BlkJack-21
log in
1) Message boards : Number crunching : Vote for the MilkyWay favicon! (Message 8501)
Posted 16 Jan 2009 by Profile BlkJack-21
#7..I agree #9 and #10 look too much like Orbit@Home.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : WU Credits (Message 4932)
Posted 21 Aug 2008 by Profile BlkJack-21
LOL

I only stumbled across this issue by accident. Nothing about this on our team forums (until today)...read this in a thread regarding the new batch of workunits @ Einstein (By far a significantly more civil discussion regarding credits).

Rather than make accusations at a particular individual or call anyone's notion "ridiculous" or just plain calling this whole situation fair or unfair..I do have only 1 suggestion and 1 comment (insight).

@ Travis..please take your position and response to this entire issue and objectively apply it to another situation. I have seen "gizmo assembler", farmer, and the like..use your own scenario. By no means am I suggesting to listen or use these examples..what I am suggesting is to make an effort to look at it objectivly from outside the realm of BOINC.

I do wish to address one final thing. In another topic it was posted something like "Why didn't Crunch3r's team address the extreme increase in production?" My intial response with team moral responsibility - I see it as being no different as my team is responsible for my posts?!? But that is a whole different can of worms...anyway since I am affiliated w/Crunch3r by team, I am 100% certain that Crunch3r has never posted "Hey everyone..look at my app @ Milky Way!" He has never revealed any such information..so my first assumtion was that he had access to some serious hardware (besides Intel gave him one sweet V8 in the past). Given his optimizing talent..it would be naive for me to believe so. So I did inquire why Crunch3r's production far exceeded any fellow teammates participation. Well to date, there still hasn't been a response.

I am not surprized that he kept silent until it was brought to light here. Nor am I surprized of his unwillingness to release this version (though he has publicly stated that he offered most of these improvements to the project admins). So I am not the least bit surpized of the sour taste he must have after the days of SETI.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Calculations. (Message 4462)
Posted 25 Jul 2008 by Profile BlkJack-21
Credt....ohhh yes Credit.

I see the argument continuously that BOINC Credits have no real value. However these credits do have an intrinsic value. A participant's mere possession of credit in relation to other participants creates that intrinsic value. This feeling of value provides participants information of how much one has contributed towards "real" science.

So yes, one can argue that this value of credit should be equal among the projects.

I would even be willing to concede to the notion of cross-project parity.

However when DA and the self-appointed "credit police" continuously attack the projects that "pay" more credit than the norm and blatently ignore those projects that grant less credit, it is impossible to give any credibility to this crusade.

Case in point: When DA approached QMC and practically threatened them that if they did not reduce their credits they would be adjusted via the stat sites. QMC quickly did what they were told. Did DA approach any projects that grant sub-par credits, like Spinhenge@home? Well I'm still waiting on that one.

It is quite possible that the BOINC Community would adopt the cross-project parity campaign with open arms if all projects were treated equally. Until then participants, like myself, that have and continue to be alienated (no pun intended) by DA and the "credit police" will continue to be vocally opposed to the notion....

It bothers us. Any real solution has to include those projects as well.


Ok then...why haven't DA, yourself, or any other member of the "credit police" attack projects that are sub-par to the norm?

I have seen countless threads across BOINC projects from the CP screaming "FOUL" your credits are too high!! Not once, have I ever seen a thread from this same group crying "FOUL" your credits are too low!!

This is NOT Cross-project parity...and if your going to see any type of success ALL projects need to be adressed with the same passion.
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Calculations. (Message 4456)
Posted 25 Jul 2008 by Profile BlkJack-21
Credt....ohhh yes Credit.

I see the argument continuously that BOINC Credits have no real value. However these credits do have an intrinsic value. A participant's mere possession of credit in relation to other participants creates that intrinsic value. This feeling of value provides participants information of how much one has contributed towards "real" science.

So yes, one can argue that this value of credit should be equal among the projects.

I would even be willing to concede to the notion of cross-project parity.

However when DA and the self-appointed "credit police" continuously attack the projects that "pay" more credit than the norm and blatently ignore those projects that grant less credit, it is impossible to give any credibility to this crusade.

Case in point: When DA approached QMC and practically threatened them that if they did not reduce their credits they would be adjusted via the stat sites. QMC quickly did what they were told. Did DA approach any projects that grant sub-par credits, like Spinhenge@home? Well I'm still waiting on that one.

It is quite possible that the BOINC Community would adopt the cross-project parity campaign with open arms if all projects were treated equally. Until then participants, like myself, that have and continue to be alienated (no pun intended) by DA and the "credit police" will continue to be vocally opposed to the notion....




Main page · Your account · Message boards


Copyright © 2017 AstroInformatics Group