Posts by Teratoma [SETI.USA]

1) Message boards : Number crunching : WU Credits (Message 4931) Posted 21 Aug 2008 by Teratoma [SETI.USA] Post: on the anti-motivational theme.... I guess Crunch3r got caught focusing. =8-0
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Calculations. (Message 4461) Posted 25 Jul 2008 by Teratoma [SETI.USA] Post: It is in this section at the bottom. Reward participants. Public-resource computing projects must provide â€incentivesâ€ in order to attract and retain participants. The primary incentive for many participants is credit: a numeric measure of how much computation they have contributed. BOINC provides a creditaccounting system that reflects usage of multiple resource types (CPU, network, disk), is common across multiple projects, and is highly resistant to â€cheatingâ€ (attempts to gain undeserved credit). BOINC also makes it easy for projects to add visualization graphics to their applications, which can provide screensaver graphics. Note the words "is common across multiple projects". What does that mean other than the projects should have a common credit system? Common is not the same as equal. Credits should be calculated using the same methodology, a common system. The first part of that sentence (which you left out) states "...that reflects usage of multiple resource types (CPU, network, disk)..." Does every project use those resources in the exact same way? Does every computer have resources equal to every other computer? No, of course not. They are not equal and credits will not be equal. I know that you realize this and this is all about granting excessive credit. Once again...so what? Projects have been given autonomy and a credit system to use as an incentive. Let them use it. If WCG or Rosetta doubles their credit, increase their participation & FLOPS, and actually make that discovery that cures a disease that one day may afflict you, will you whine about the credits then, John? It also states this... Share resources among autonomous projects. BOINC-based projects are autonomous. Projects are not centrally authorized or registered. Each project operates its own servers and stands completely on its own. Then why would Dr. Anderson himself use strong-arm tactics to pressure "autonomous" projects to modify their credits. What is with the obession of credits? These egalitarian views are like something out of a Vonnegut story and Dr. Anderson thinks he's the Handicapper General. Life is not fair, why should BOINC be any different? Were you treated unfairly as a child and are now trying to compensate by being our champion of fairness? Well guess what...I don't need a champion, I didn't ask for one and 99% of the community here doesn't want one either. Where will it stop? After you make the credits fair what will you champion then John? Resource share fairness? Are you going to force us to give equal time to every project. That sounds fair! Life is not fair, BOINC is not fair....get over it!
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Calculations. (Message 4455) Posted 24 Jul 2008 by Teratoma [SETI.USA] Post: The design of BOINC was to have approximate cross project parity in credits. Any project that is grossly out of line intentionally is intentionally breaking a design goal of BOINC, and has been a goal of BOINC since the very beginning. Interesting. Perhaps you should read "BOINC: A System for Public-Resource Computing and Storage" by Dr. Anderson written in 2004. Particularly section 2.1. You can find it here...http://boinc.berkeley.edu/grid_paper_04.pdf This is going to be long, so I apologize. 2.1 Goals of BOINC BOINCâ€™s general goal is to advance the public resource computing paradigm: to encourage the creation of many projects, and to encourage a large fraction of the worldâ€™s computer owners to participate in one or more projects. Specific goals include: Reduce the barriers of entry to public-resource computing. BOINC allows a research scientist with moderate computer skills to create and operate a large public-resource computing project with about a week of initial work and an hour per week of maintenance. The server for a BOINCbased project can consist of a single machine configured with common open-source software (Linux, Apache, PHP, MySQL, Python). Share resources among autonomous projects. BOINC-based projects are autonomous. Projects are not centrally authorized or registered. Each project operates its own servers and stands completely on its own. Nevertheless, PC owners can seamlessly participate in multiple projects, and can assign to each project a â€resource shareâ€ determining how scarce resource (such as CPU and disk space) are divided among projects. If most participants register with multiple projects, then overall resource utilization is improved: while one project is closed for repairs, other projects temporarily inherit its computing power. On a particular computer, the CPU might work for one project while the network is transferring files for another. Support diverse applications. BOINC accommodates a wide range of applications; it provides flexible and scalable mechanism for distributing data, and its scheduling algorithms intelligently match requirements with resources. Existing applications in common languages (C, C++, FORTRAN) can run as BOINC applications with little or no modification. An application can consist of several files (e.g. multiple programs and a coordinating script). New versions of applications can be deployed with no participant involvement. Reward participants. Public-resource computing projects must provide â€incentivesâ€ in order to attract and retain participants. The primary incentive for many participants is credit: a numeric measure of how much computation they have contributed. BOINC provides a creditaccounting system that reflects usage of multiple resource types (CPU, network, disk), is common across multiple projects, and is highly resistant to â€cheatingâ€ (attempts to gain undeserved credit). BOINC also makes it easy for projects to add visualization graphics to their applications, which can provide screensaver graphics. Maybe it is in secret code, but I do not see "cross project parity in credits" as a goal of BOINC. When it is all said and done, when my bones have turned to dust, it will matter not how much credit I was granted. It will matter to me that I have made some contribution to the scientific community. (I know...I'll be dead and no one will care what matters to me). Fate did not deal me the "Brilliant Scientist" card, but BOINC gives me the opportunity to contribute something. And that something is better than nothing. All I ask for is some credits. Credits that do not cost anything. The last part of section 2.1 above talks about incentive and credit being the primary one. If all credit were to be equal then the only incentive left (as mentioned) is visual graphics. We are not children who are easily amused by shiny, pretty objects (okay...maybe a little.) This leaves the scientific value of a project. This can be measured in many ways but is completely subjective and is based on the perceptions of the volunteer. Feedback can be one of the ways of measuring value. "Show me what we have done." I can think of several projects that fall short in that aspect. Don't worry, I'm sure someone will come along and point them out to you. I do not post often. And I pretty much avoid this nonsense. But I can take only so much. Why does the credit mean so much to you? I'm a Credit Whore and I don't go around to the low paying projects and raise a stink, but I still participate. Why do you want us to get less? Why don't you spend your time on something that really needs saving like the environment and leave the credit system alone.