malariacontrol.net leads to parking page.

malariacontrol.net leads to parking page.

I was referring to the disease, and wondering why they gave up if they've not completed eradicating it.

I'm back for my (now) fortnightly catchup.
Now it's March, I wonder if I should try for an update. Just in case I get a response dating back from December
Maybe they've stopped being fed up of me by now

What are Malaria and SIMAP in your sig? Both pages aren't working here. Have you really only done 4 projects?

As others have said, long dead projects - maybe from 7-10yrs ago
And yes, I've only ever run 4 projects, 2 long dead. I only ever wanted to run Rosetta tbh, but WCG caught my eye at one time.
None of the other projects interest me at all.

---

malariacontrol.net leads to parking page.

I was referring to the disease, and wondering why they gave up if they've not completed eradicating it.

Boinc wouldn't be the only way of achieving developments or advances.
No doubt just a coincidence that GSK have developed a vaccine with reportedly up to 80% efficacy quite recently.
Aiui malaria drugs have been notoriously ineffective before now - sub 50% - so this is quite the news.

A news report on the subject

And the Lancet paper here

---

I'm back for my (now) fortnightly catchup.
Now it's March, I wonder if I should try for an update. Just in case I get a response dating back from December
Maybe they've stopped being fed up of me by now

What are Malaria and SIMAP in your sig? Both pages aren't working here. Have you really only done 4 projects?

As others have said, long dead projects - maybe from 7-10yrs ago
And yes, I've only ever run 4 projects, 2 long dead. I only ever wanted to run Rosetta tbh, but WCG caught my eye at one time.
None of the other projects interest me at all.

There are loads of biology projects. Sidock immediately springs to mind, and Folding@Home if you don't mind processing outside Boinc. GPUGrid if you have a Nvidia.

malariacontrol.net leads to parking page.

I was referring to the disease, and wondering why they gave up if they've not completed eradicating it.

Boinc wouldn't be the only way of achieving developments or advances.
No doubt just a coincidence that GSK have developed a vaccine with reportedly up to 80% efficacy quite recently.
Aiui malaria drugs have been notoriously ineffective before now - sub 50% - so this is quite the news.

A news report on the subject

And the Lancet paper here

Vaccines suck. We should be making cures. I don't want to fill myself with a vaccine against every single thing, I want to get a cure if and when I get it. I haven't had a covid vaccine, because the chances of me needing one are very remote.

malariacontrol.net leads to parking page.

I was referring to the disease, and wondering why they gave up if they've not completed eradicating it.

Boinc wouldn't be the only way of achieving developments or advances.
No doubt just a coincidence that GSK have developed a vaccine with reportedly up to 80% efficacy quite recently.
Aiui malaria drugs have been notoriously ineffective before now - sub 50% - so this is quite the news.

A news report on the subject

And the Lancet paper here

Vaccines suck. We should be making cures. I don't want to fill myself with a vaccine against every single thing, I want to get a cure if and when I get it. I haven't had a covid vaccine, because the chances of me needing one are very remote.

Vaccines are a preventative.
You're saying you prefer to be diseased first, then cured.
Up until now, we haven't found a cure.

It's better to prevent 247,000,000 people from being diseased per year (malaria figure for 2021), not just because of the 619,000 who died from it (1 in 400) but for the longer-term effects even if people don't die.

But you be you. Noted.

---

I came here this evening because I got to one of my remote computers, updated it and got 0 tasks

That seemed weird because I thought there were still a few million tasks to run. And there still are on the front page

But on the Server Status page there aren't any tasks unsent, which makes me think bwsrv1 is down, though not showing as such on that page

And 38k tasks awaiting assimilation, so that's another clue

Just in case you notice the same thing

Edit: I just email'd Admin, just in case someone's started listening to me again

---

My most recent tasks received were these:

Thu 23 Mar 2023 01:28:23 PM EDT | Rosetta@home | Requesting new tasks for CPU
Thu 23 Mar 2023 01:28:25 PM EDT | Rosetta@home | Scheduler request completed: got 12 new tasks

I have not received any since because I have not needed any.

This page:
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/server_status.php
says
Tasks ready to send 29794
from which I infer that there are tasks available.

---

My most recent tasks received were these:

Thu 23 Mar 2023 01:28:23 PM EDT | Rosetta@home | Requesting new tasks for CPU
Thu 23 Mar 2023 01:28:25 PM EDT | Rosetta@home | Scheduler request completed: got 12 new tasks

I have not received any since because I have not needed any.

This page:
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/server_status.php
says
Tasks ready to send 29794
from which I infer that there are tasks available.

Yes, seems fine now.
In my log I saw fresh tasks coming down 6 hours after I posted here, so while I didn't get an email reply, servers did start making tasks available very shortly after

---

malariacontrol.net leads to parking page.

I was referring to the disease, and wondering why they gave up if they've not completed eradicating it.

Boinc wouldn't be the only way of achieving developments or advances.
No doubt just a coincidence that GSK have developed a vaccine with reportedly up to 80% efficacy quite recently.
Aiui malaria drugs have been notoriously ineffective before now - sub 50% - so this is quite the news.

A news report on the subject

And the Lancet paper here

Vaccines suck. We should be making cures. I don't want to fill myself with a vaccine against every single thing, I want to get a cure if and when I get it. I haven't had a covid vaccine, because the chances of me needing one are very remote.

On the other hand, vaccines have saved hundreds of millions of lives in the past 100 years. Smallpox and Polio vaccines were among the most successful. From the 16th through 18th centuries diseases like smallpox, measles, diptheria, typhus, influenza and others decimated and even wiped out entire populations of Native Americans. The indigenous population in North America prior to the arrival of Europeans is estmated at least 40 million. But those people had no immunity to the diseases carried by the invaders. As a result, within two hundred years, disease and forced labor killed off 95% of the native population.

Although you personally might hate vaccines, hundreds of millions around the world owe their lives to them. While you were waiting for a cure to be developed, you might have been among the victims.

On the other hand, vaccines have saved hundreds of millions of lives in the past 100 years. Smallpox and Polio vaccines were among the most successful. From the 16th through 18th centuries diseases like smallpox, measles, diptheria, typhus, influenza and others decimated and even wiped out entire populations of Native Americans. The indigenous population in North America prior to the arrival of Europeans is estmated at least 40 million. But those people had no immunity to the diseases carried by the invaders. As a result, within two hundred years, disease and forced labor killed off 95% of the native population.

Although you personally might hate vaccines, hundreds of millions around the world owe their lives to them. While you were waiting for a cure to be developed, you might have been among the victims.

The difference between you and me is where you place the danger line. If you were told there was a disease that was going to wipe out 50 people worldwide, you wouldn't get the vaccine. Chances are you'd never catch it. What number would you place on predicted worldwide deaths before you get the vaccine? Covid is 1 in 1000. A 1 in 1000 chance of death is not enough to concern me.

Then there's the stats I've seen of more vaccinated folk having to go to hospital than unvaccinated. Are we sure it's helping and not hindering? I know someone who caught a weaker strain of covid after three jabs, and he got worse symptoms. I'm not impressed.

Then there's this thing called evolution and survival of the fittest. If we help the weak, we're making the next generation worse. Pretty soon we'll be dying of the common cold.

And how much has this cost the world? Yes, you can place a price on a life. If we all end up poorer, we're less likely to live a good healthy safe life.

The difference between you and me is where you place the danger line. If you were told there was a disease that was going to wipe out 50 people worldwide, you wouldn't get the vaccine. Chances are you'd never catch it. What number would you place on predicted worldwide deaths before you get the vaccine? Covid is 1 in 1000. A 1 in 1000 chance of death is not enough to concern me.

Your claimed mortality rate is the ratio of total deaths divided by total world population.

The correct way to calculate a mortality rate is to use the total number of resolved cases as the divisor; 6.8 million people died from Covid-19 out of 680 million cases worldwide, which is a mortality rate of 1% -- rather large, as far as flu-like diseases go.

The difference between you and me is where you place the danger line. If you were told there was a disease that was going to wipe out 50 people worldwide, you wouldn't get the vaccine. Chances are you'd never catch it. What number would you place on predicted worldwide deaths before you get the vaccine? Covid is 1 in 1000. A 1 in 1000 chance of death is not enough to concern me.

Your claimed mortality rate is the ratio of total deaths divided by total world population.

The correct way to calculate a mortality rate is to use the total number of resolved cases as the divisor; 6.8 million people died from Covid-19 out of 680 million cases worldwide, which is a mortality rate of 1% -- rather large, as far as flu-like diseases go.

No, that's the wrong way. My way includes the chances of catching it. All I need to know is the chances of me dying vs. the chances of me not dying. Not dying includes both recovering from it and not catching it in the first place. So 0.1%. Low enough I don't actually know anyone who's died of it. However I know about 50 who recovered, some of them twice, the twice ones all having had the vaccine and still getting it just as bad or worse! What are we up to now, 5 doses? It isn't working!

P.S. those who recovered are the healthier ones, so the next generation will be stronger.

The difference between you and me is where you place the danger line. If you were told there was a disease that was going to wipe out 50 people worldwide, you wouldn't get the vaccine. Chances are you'd never catch it. What number would you place on predicted worldwide deaths before you get the vaccine? Covid is 1 in 1000. A 1 in 1000 chance of death is not enough to concern me.

Your claimed mortality rate is the ratio of total deaths divided by total world population.

The correct way to calculate a mortality rate is to use the total number of resolved cases as the divisor; 6.8 million people died from Covid-19 out of 680 million cases worldwide, which is a mortality rate of 1% -- rather large, as far as flu-like diseases go.

No, that's the wrong way. My way includes the chances of catching it. All I need to know is the chances of me dying vs. the chances of me not dying. Not dying includes both recovering from it and not catching it in the first place. So 0.1%. Low enough I don't actually know anyone who's died of it. However I know about 50 who recovered, some of them twice, the twice ones all having had the vaccine and still getting it just as bad or worse! What are we up to now, 5 doses? It isn't working!

P.S. those who recovered are the healthier ones, so the next generation will be stronger.

Your way does not make any statement at all about the chances of becoming infected. There is a very real difference between the rate of infection and the mortality rate, and no statistical manipulation will ever show otherwise. In using the total population to calculate the mortality rate, you are assuming that 100% of the total population has been exposed to the virus.
As for why the vaccines "aren't working", you ignore the fact that there are many variants of SARS-COV-2 out there now, but the vaccines currently in use were designed to combat the initial strain. It is thus no surprise to anyone (or at least should not be) that the effectiveness of the vaccine has declined.
Finally, viruses do mutate significantly, and rapidly, so each new strain becomes something new as far as the immune system is concerned. The best the next generation of humans can hope for is that their immune systems might be slightly more capable of fighting off an infection from one of those new strains.

The difference between you and me is where you place the danger line. If you were told there was a disease that was going to wipe out 50 people worldwide, you wouldn't get the vaccine. Chances are you'd never catch it. What number would you place on predicted worldwide deaths before you get the vaccine? Covid is 1 in 1000. A 1 in 1000 chance of death is not enough to concern me.

Your claimed mortality rate is the ratio of total deaths divided by total world population.

The correct way to calculate a mortality rate is to use the total number of resolved cases as the divisor; 6.8 million people died from Covid-19 out of 680 million cases worldwide, which is a mortality rate of 1% -- rather large, as far as flu-like diseases go.

No, that's the wrong way. My way includes the chances of catching it. All I need to know is the chances of me dying vs. the chances of me not dying. Not dying includes both recovering from it and not catching it in the first place. So 0.1%. Low enough I don't actually know anyone who's died of it. However I know about 50 who recovered, some of them twice, the twice ones all having had the vaccine and still getting it just as bad or worse! What are we up to now, 5 doses? It isn't working!

P.S. those who recovered are the healthier ones, so the next generation will be stronger.

Your way does not make any statement at all about the chances of becoming infected. There is a very real difference between the rate of infection and the mortality rate, and no statistical manipulation will ever show otherwise.

It's you trying to look at complex stats. All you need is how many died and how many didn't. Obviously, those who died are those who managed to catch it, and are also susceptible to it. No calculation is required. All you need to know is the chances you will be one of the dead. That chance is 1 in 1000, a very small amount.

In using the total population to calculate the mortality rate, you are assuming that 100% of the total population has been exposed to the virus.

The exact opposite, I'm allowing for people to have not been exposed to it. You may well be one of those.

As for why the vaccines "aren't working", you ignore the fact that there are many variants of SARS-COV-2 out there now, but the vaccines currently in use were designed to combat the initial strain. It is thus no surprise to anyone (or at least should not be) that the effectiveness of the vaccine has declined.

Doesn't matter why they aren't working, the fact is they don't.

Finally, viruses do mutate significantly, and rapidly, so each new strain becomes something new as far as the immune system is concerned. The best the next generation of humans can hope for is that their immune systems might be slightly more capable of fighting off an infection from one of those new strains.

Exactly why we don't die of the common cold.

@Mr P Hucker
OK, I give up -- it is not worth my effort trying to get you to see that you are using pseudostats in an attempt to support your pseudoscience -- you will never think beyond the world of the Trumpophant.
The vaccines all had an effectiveness above 95% against the initial strain of the virus, and that is a demonstrable fact. There is now work going on to develop vaccines capable of providing protection against any coronavirus, and with mRNA technology, I have no doubt that will be successful -- maybe not in my lifetime, but hopefully in yours.
Hauling out the common cold is a definite non-starter -- every rhinovirus ("rhin" means "nose", not "rhinoceros"), even the most virulent of them, has a very low mortality rate, but that does not ensure one will not appear some day with very high mortality. The flu viruses, for example, for the most part are no more lethal than SARS-COV-2, but that did not stop the 1918 H1N1 variant from bursting onto the scene, infecting at least 1/3 of the world population, and killing at least 10% of those. There is simply no way to predict when a variant of any virus will appear with very high virulence AND very high mortality.
So, take your chances with believing that vaccines don't work, ignore the fact that smallpox has been eradicated, ignore the fact that polio and rubella are no longer the terrifying threats that they once were, and continue to live in your rose-coloured world.

You say you give up, then proceed to write a paragraph of text, could it be you're a silly little child who has to get the last word in?

There are no pseudostats, I shall reveal them.
Population of the world: 8 billion from https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
Total deaths from covid: 6.8 million from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
So that's less than a 1 in 1000 chance of any one person in the world dying of covid. Not enough to worry about.

Interesting you call me a Trumpophant. Firstly I'm not in the USA, so unfortunately I couldn't vote for him. Secondly, the right wing is far more sensible than the thieving left wing who think it's ok to steal money from your taxes without your permission and give it to the "needy". Needy folk can get your money from a charity IF you choose to donate. If people really wanted to help, and the government stopped doing so, all you lefties would immediately donate their cash through charities instead. Or perhaps..... you wouldn't? Maybe you just want everyone else to help?

There is no point in making a vaccine against something which is going to change. If the vaccine doesn't include what will be caught later on, there's no point in it whatsoever. By the time they make one which works, we'll all be immune anyway, and the weak will be out of the gene pool.

I guess you're not familiar with the common cold killing Eskimos when we first met them. It only has a low mortality rate because our immune systems have learned to fight it off.

And you continue living in your world where the governments ruin the whole world economy by closing places down, raising prices so everyone is too poor to eat, and nobody can afford electricity. Covid did very little harm, the governments killed off the world.

Does rosetta run faster with or without hyperthreading?

Does rosetta run faster with or without hyperthreading?

I find HT is always faster overall. Pretty much what it says on the tine, 50% speed increase by doubling the virtual cores.