If you are here, and you are volunteering and bearing the cost of running your systems then you are in the "we" like it or not ...

I think your are missing my point, as you seem to miss everything in your ramblings. Please don't speak for me. Please don't spout your opinions with your 'we' as if those opinions include me. You also seem to want to speak for the project admin here, but I don't see anything that indicates you represent them, and you certainly don't represent me. "I" am not doing science on the cheap even if you think eveyone else is - get it? "I" do not think that "we can do things cheaply", whether as "we" you are talking about all crunchers or as a MilkyWay project staff (get them to give you a tag if you are). I am certainly not part of any of your "we" since I repeat my view that the project cost with all the contributions of volunteer time, computers and electricity bills is HUGE.

You're nit-picking.
It was meant in the broad scale of things. "You" were not singled out.

No I am not nit-picking. The statement was "we are doing science on the cheap" but I object to someone saying that I am doing science on the cheap. By all means agree that you are doing it on the cheap, but please don't speak for me and say that I am doing it on the cheap. What I've contributed to MilkyWay is NOT cheap.

Nobody said that what you have contributed is...however when putting things in perspective, all of our systems allow them to get the work done for less money than what it would cost them normally for equivalent processing time on a cluster / supercomputer. Ergo, it is "on the cheap"...from a certain perspective. I'm sure Paul wasn't trying to say that you're cheap or I'm cheap or whatever, just that if there wasn't an economical savings to doing things this way, it would make a whole lot more sense to just do it on a cluster, which is what Predictor ended up doing...

Say what you want, but not that "we are doing science cheap". I just completed 18,000,000 MilkyWay WUs. They weren't "cheap" as far as I am concerned, for me or for the project.

Ahh...but we do agree that a GPU gets real "good bang for your and my buck". Now the cost/credit is cheaper here using the optimised app than anywhere else. Is that science on the cheap or just cheaper science? Combined we are doing science on the cheap, but individually proving not so cheap hardware? It's all a matter of perspective.

Ahh...but we do agree that a GPU gets real "good bang for your and my buck". Now the cost/credit is cheaper here using the optimised app than anywhere else. Is that science on the cheap or just cheaper science? Combined we are doing science on the cheap, but individually proving not so cheap hardware? It's all a matter of perspective.

Yes, it is about perspective, and not about twisting the perspective by someone else. Since the advent of ATI GPUs here on MW, approx 6 months ago, I have spent more on BOINC that I ever did on entire BOINC in the years before, and I am certainly spending far more on electricity, keeping these computers and ATI cards fed, than I ever did before. It's not exactly "cheap" science for me, so I still don't take too kindly to someone trying to say that "we" are doing science on the cheap.

---

Say what you want, but not that "we are doing science cheap". I just completed 18,000,000 MilkyWay WUs. They weren't "cheap" as far as I am concerned, for me or for the project.

Only 1 credit per WU? This project is cheap.

---

me@rescam.org

Say what you want, but not that "we are doing science cheap". I just completed 18,000,000 MilkyWay WUs. They weren't "cheap" as far as I am concerned, for me or for the project.

Only 1 credit per WU? This project is cheap.

Yea, I demand the rest of my credits - I should be on 500,000,000 by now :P

---

>cheap
I took it to mean 'cheap for rpi.'
They don't have enough grad students with abacuses to do the grunt work, so us volunteering time and clock cycles makes up for their lack.

Similarly, Oxford can't afford enough Cray-months to do all the climate simulations that their atmos department would like, so once again our time and clock cycles fill the gap...

Anyway, my 3870s can't keep up with the recent spate of WUs so it looks like time to upgrade them to 4870s like my other one.

---

Cheers,

PeterV

.

Similarly, Oxford can't afford enough Cray-months to do all the climate simulations that their atmos department would like, so once again our time and clock cycles fill the gap...

We're actually getting access to a 16 card/32 GPU Tesla cluster soon here in Oxford... :)

---

Similarly, Oxford can't afford enough Cray-months to do all the climate simulations that their atmos department would like, so once again our time and clock cycles fill the gap...

We're actually getting access to a 16 card/32 GPU Tesla cluster soon here in Oxford... :)

That'll be a nice rig... *DROOL* :-)))

---

Lovely greetings, Cori

Similarly, Oxford can't afford enough Cray-months to do all the climate simulations that their atmos department would like, so once again our time and clock cycles fill the gap...

We're actually getting access to a 16 card/32 GPU Tesla cluster soon here in Oxford... :)

That'll be a nice rig... *DROOL* :-)))

I'm tempted to book some time on it (as it's free to Oxford students) and run GPUGrid on it for a day, or SETI which isn't no. of CPU bound.

---

Similarly, Oxford can't afford enough Cray-months to do all the climate simulations that their atmos department would like, so once again our time and clock cycles fill the gap...

We're actually getting access to a 16 card/32 GPU Tesla cluster soon here in Oxford... :)

That'll be a nice rig... *DROOL* :-)))

I'm tempted to book some time on it (as it's free to Oxford students) and run GPUGrid on it for a day, or SETI which isn't no. of CPU bound.

I think I'm getting envious... :-D
Shall I give you access to my weak account key on GPU.Grid?

---

Lovely greetings, Cori

>cheap
I took it to mean 'cheap for rpi.'
They don't have enough grad students with abacuses to do the grunt work, so us volunteering time and clock cycles makes up for their lack.

Similarly, Oxford can't afford enough Cray-months to do all the climate simulations that their atmos department would like, so once again our time and clock cycles fill the gap...

Anyway, my 3870s can't keep up with the recent spate of WUs so it looks like time to upgrade them to 4870s like my other one.

Think of it as democratic science :) You guys vote with your CPUs and GPUs on what science you want done and are the most interested in :D

---

Say what you want, but not that "we are doing science cheap". I just completed 18,000,000 MilkyWay WUs. They weren't "cheap" as far as I am concerned, for me or for the project.

You should know by now that I'm typically not going to just say something that someone likes to hear just because it is what they want to hear...

Paul was correct in what he said looking at it from the project's point of view. His statement wasn't directed at you specifically, and you are being way too sensitive about it...

Say what you want, but not that "we are doing science cheap". I just completed 18,000,000 MilkyWay WUs. They weren't "cheap" as far as I am concerned, for me or for the project.

You should know by now that I'm typically not going to just say something that someone likes to hear just because it is what they want to hear...

Paul was correct in what he said looking at it from the project's point of view. His statement wasn't directed at you specifically, and you are being way too sensitive about it...

OK, you and Paul are cheap. Fine. You are doing it on the cheap. Fine. I object to someone speaking for me and saying "we are doing science on the cheap" when it ain't dam well cheap for me. No he was not correct and neither are you just by saying so.

Cheap!

---

We are a team here. Playing the game for the coaches (Travis, Dave and the rest of the MW staff). There is no "I", "Me", or "You" in team. That's why it was stated in the plural form "We". You simply took it out of context and should't have taken any offense as there was absolutely none implied.

I've said the last I have to say in this matter. It would really be nice if this little B and G session ended pretty quick.

---

4870 GPU
4870 GPU

Say what you want, but not that "we are doing science cheap". I just completed 18,000,000 MilkyWay WUs. They weren't "cheap" as far as I am concerned, for me or for the project.

You should know by now that I'm typically not going to just say something that someone likes to hear just because it is what they want to hear...

Paul was correct in what he said looking at it from the project's point of view. His statement wasn't directed at you specifically, and you are being way too sensitive about it...

OK, you and Paul are cheap. Fine. You are doing it on the cheap. Fine. I object to someone speaking for me and saying "we are doing science on the cheap" when it ain't dam well cheap for me. No he was not correct and neither are you just by saying so.

Cheap!

I agree ice. Crunching is not a cheap hobby.

We are a team here. Playing the game for the coaches (Travis, Dave and the rest of the MW staff). There is no "I", "Me", or "You" in team. That's why it was stated in the plural form "We". You simply took it out of context and should't have taken any offense as there was absolutely none implied.

I've said the last I have to say in this matter. It would really be nice if this little B and G session ended pretty quick.

It's not a question of taking offence. I am simply saying that will not accept someone saying that I am doing science on the cheap, or implying that I am. The statement in question is not acceptable as far as I am concerned and I will continue to excercise my right of reply and say so. You can keep on saying that we are doing science on the cheap, and I will keep replying that I am not doing science on the cheap, and some argument about Travis being a coach is not going to swing it for you.

---

Now now children..

What was the topic I posted about again? aha

Say what you want, but not that "we are doing science cheap". I just completed 18,000,000 MilkyWay WUs. They weren't "cheap" as far as I am concerned, for me or for the project.

You should know by now that I'm typically not going to just say something that someone likes to hear just because it is what they want to hear...

Paul was correct in what he said looking at it from the project's point of view. His statement wasn't directed at you specifically, and you are being way too sensitive about it...

OK, you and Paul are cheap. Fine. You are doing it on the cheap. Fine. I object to someone speaking for me and saying "we are doing science on the cheap" when it ain't dam well cheap for me. No he was not correct and neither are you just by saying so.

Cheap!

I thought you were going to send me a bunch of TOTL ATI cards, El Cheapo.

---

me@rescam.org

..and another thread is showing our happiness for being a part of this project. ;-)

all I want to say about this is that - I am SO glad I am free to come and go
as I please. I guess i must be the only one.. as it sounds. Aint I lucky! ;-)

---

We are a team here. Playing the game for the coaches (Travis, Dave and the rest of the MW staff). There is no "I", "Me", or "You" in team. That's why it was stated in the plural form "We". You simply took it out of context and should't have taken any offense as there was absolutely none implied.

I've said the last I have to say in this matter. It would really be nice if this little B and G session ended pretty quick.

It's not a question of taking offence. I am simply saying that will not accept someone saying that I am doing science on the cheap, or implying that I am. The statement in question is not acceptable as far as I am concerned and I will continue to excercise my right of reply and say so. You can keep on saying that we are doing science on the cheap, and I will keep replying that I am not doing science on the cheap, and some argument about Travis being a coach is not going to swing it for you.

Read slowly: I am not saying your expenses are "cheap".

One of the fundamental reasons that distributed computing even exists is that the researchers can outsource the expense to those of us who volunteer time. This fact lowers their Operating Expense (Accounting 101 term). It is RPI and every single BOINC project out there who is being "cheap", as it were, not you, me, nor any of the rest of us volunteers.

You continue to flail about thinking people meant something that they didn't and still do not mean...

You are getting up on the proverbial "High Horse". The only problem is, the horse is, like our Norwegian Blue, quite deceased. Dakota tribal wisdom says when on a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.

I agree with you. I just wish others were'nt wearing their feelings on their shoulders too easily offended. I know I've spent alot of money building and upgrading systems and know fully well that others have done the same. Some have spent alot more than me, that doesn't matter. We all give what we can afford to give and no more. Some just believe their contribution is more important when it's not. They may have more RAC but that's not in question.
Randy

---

4870 GPU
4870 GPU