1) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 4916)
Posted 4 Feb 2008 by Dagorath
Post:
It\'s sad that just a few people who just can\'t give without receiving something back are driving this never ending debate about nothing. The vast majority of crunchers just don\'t give a damn about credits so just drop the credit system completely and lets get on with the research.



Actually, the primary people driving the issue are hard-core \"things must be equal\" types. Sure, that\'s a nice goal, but simply mandating it doesn\'t make it actually \"equal\". For example, look at what just recently happened here, with some people not getting any credit at all for work performed that just happened to get squashed by the server changes. Also, what about the fact that the SETI \"standard\" doesn\'t take into account that you can exceed the \"standard\" by using the optimized clients? How about trying to compare a project like ABC against SETI while using a K6-2? Since ABC is more integer math than floating point, the integer unit in the K6 will handle ABC better than what the floating point will do for SETI, seeing how the FPU in the K6 was very poor...



Good points all. Just a few of the thousands of reasons why it\'s impossible to award credits properly for a thousand different architectures running several different operating systems crunching over 30 different science apps. At the end of 2008 I bet there will 10 more projects each with their own idiosyncracies and hurdles pertaining to credits. A volunteer, non-profit community is going to overcome all that? Not in 20 years. Not in 100 years. You\'ll call me a pessimist today but in 20 years you\'ll know I was a realist with a firm understanding of how big the problem really is and how few resources this community has to throw at the problem. We haven\'t a snowball\'s chance in hell of seeing a good credit system, we need to admit it and waste no more time on it and get on with life and science.
2) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 4915)
Posted 4 Feb 2008 by Dagorath
Post:
It\'s sad that just a few people who just can\'t give without receiving something back are driving this never ending debate about nothing. The vast majority of crunchers just don\'t give a damn about credits so just drop the credit system completely and lets get on with the research.



Thats a bold claim. I think you\'d be surprised how many people with high output would bail if that happened. The \"majority\" doesnt necessarily outweight the group of people who like the competitive nature of BOINC and consider it as (if not the) driving factor.


I think you would be surprised at how few would bail. The notion that credits drives the whole thing is false doctrine. If it were true then the projects offering high pay would be seeing huge gains in donated CPU cycles. But they\'re not. That tells me the vast majority crunch for some reason other than credits. For the few who can\'t do it without credit, kiss them goodbye and abolish the credits for the credits are total bulls**t. They have been cheated and miscalculated by so many and for so long that they have absolutely no meaning and relevance anymore. They\'re a sad joke at best and they\'ll never be anything more.

Why destroy something that makes both sides happy? The only victim would be science. Fine tuning the system makes more sense than radically change it.


I believe the science is suffering already. And it ain\'t making me happy knowing devs are wasting time on this issue, time that would be better invested in improving other aspects of BOINC, and I bet a lot of other crunchers feel the same way. They can fine tune, radically change or anything in between for another 20 years and it won\'t make any difference. 20 years from now you\'ll be reading the same whines and complaints, nothing will change, because the dream of fair and equitable credits is hopeless. In 20 years you\'ll see. Fortunately, DA already sees that and that\'s why he\'s abandoned the benchmark scheme and is now putting the onus on projects. He\'s washed his hands of it all and is threatening to ask the stats sites to adjust the credits from \"bad\" projects. If the stats sites are ever foolish enough to open that can o\' worms it will explode in their face.

3) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 4905)
Posted 3 Feb 2008 by Dagorath
Post:
It\'s sad that just a few people who just can\'t give without receiving something back are driving this never ending debate about nothing. The vast majority of crunchers just don\'t give a damn about credits so just drop the credit system completely and lets get on with the research.

4) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 4449)
Posted 11 Jan 2008 by Dagorath
Post:
There\'s a new [trac]wiki:CreditProposal[/trac] that everyone can read. Needs some understanding of higher mathematics, though.


Higher maths or maybe just half-baked maths? I mean the maths seemed a little difficult at first but then I realised it\'s just because there are gaps that need to be filled in before it can be turned into code. The gaps are of course necessary because each project will need to fill in the gaps in a way that suits their project. I doubt there is a general solution that fits all projects.

I am not sure who wrote the proposal but if Berkeley ever implements the proposal server side then I imagine many projects will issue the standard excuses for not adopting the new server code (as they should)...

1. when we get time we\'ll examine the proposal
2. (6 months later) we are currently reviewing the proposal
3. (6 months later) we are currently looking at the new server code but it isn\'t easy, we hope Berkeley will provide a credit specific API or something to make it easier to implement, we encourage anyone who can code and has spare time to help write the API
4. (6 months later) we have a few scripts and a new science app that might implement the new credit system and we might be ready to test them next year
5. (next year) we lost the work in a recent disk crash so we\'ll have to start over, sorry there was a fault in our backup script but it\'s fixed now ;)
6. we are happy to announce that we have concluded our investigation, this project will now shut down, thank you all for your devotion and hard work, results will be published soon, btw, we are deleting all our work on the new credit proposal because the problem the proposal seeks to rectify (crunchers are gravitating to projects that pay high credits) simply doesn\'t exist

5) Forums : General Topics : Poll: Do you think you're getting enough credits? (Message 3065)
Posted 3 Oct 2007 by Dagorath
Post:
[quote]
I disagree with mscharmack on both points. Most of us are in it because we want to contribute to the science. You might see a few protesters quit Cosmology if you decrease the credits but you'll recoup that loss quickly. Over the long run you'll see the user base and contributed CPU cycles increase continually as long as the credit payout isn't significantly lower than the average.

Get the project stable (referring to the problems with HR and pending credits) and get it on this list and you'll see the user base grow every day.



You must be new to DC if you think most users are in it for the science, and not the credit.


Lolol, I think it's the other way around, son, but thanks for your opinion and specious argument anyway.

I'll restate my standard challenge: Try to start a new BOINC (or any DC project) with NO credit awarded, and see how many users you can get.


You obviously wouldn't crunch such a project, caught up in false notions of value as you are, but if it were a novel and worthwhile project (i.e. not just another protein folding project but something new, different and important to the future of humanity) I believe it would attract many thousands. There really are charitable people in the world who give and expect nothing in return.

6) Forums : General Topics : Poll: Do you think you're getting enough credits? (Message 3044)
Posted 2 Oct 2007 by Dagorath
Post:
Lets be honest with ourselves. We are in it for the credit (I know I am.) My CPU are not particularly fast (none over or underclocked). I suppose it makes up for all the other projects where my computers only get a fraction of the credit to what they have claimed. I am sure that if the credit system changes to drastically, you will see many users stop crunching.

I think that this is unfortunate. Credit is fleeting, but scientific accomplishment is forever.

So long as everybody keeps crunching, though, we'll keep the credits flowing.


I disagree with mscharmack on both points. Most of us are in it because we want to contribute to the science. You might see a few protesters quit Cosmology if you decrease the credits but you'll recoup that loss quickly. Over the long run you'll see the user base and contributed CPU cycles increase continually as long as the credit payout isn't significantly lower than the average.

Get the project stable (referring to the problems with HR and pending credits) and get it on this list and you'll see the user base grow every day.

7) Forums : General Topics : Poll: Do you think you're getting enough credits? (Message 2804)
Posted 18 Sep 2007 by Dagorath
Post:

Thanks for your timely and informative reply, JRenkar.

8) Forums : General Topics : Poll: Do you think you're getting enough credits? (Message 2801)
Posted 18 Sep 2007 by Dagorath
Post:
Scott..

After you have your application debugged, ported to all the major operating systems, optimized and stabilized, then you should take a good look at finding a way to determine credits for the WUs accurately and make the credits close to some standard, if you have the time and manpower. If you never find the time and manpower or the nature of this project's computations just don't allow for accurate estimates then just do it the quick and dirty way like you seem to be doing now. Or maybe throw together a script that would tell you how many credits some arbitrary average machine is earning rather than rely on such reports from crunchers (small sample)

This is your project, you call the shots, we're just here to help. The only things we have a right to ask for is to not have our precious resources wasted and communications from the project admins. You're doing just fine on those 2 points. Ignore the extremists who think you should make the credits your top priority. I think you'll find most of us think the credits should be your lowest priority.