Posts by Otto

21) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Time for a new promo video? (Message 52147) Posted 27 Mar 2008 by Otto Post: Thanks for the response! I think someone with expertise on making promotional stuff and/or ads could consider making a video. Unfortunately I don't have that expertise, so I don't consider myself a candidate.
22) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Time for a new promo video? (Message 52133) Posted 26 Mar 2008 by Otto Post: The existing promo video for Rosetta@home is great, but it is about 2 years old, and there have been, I feel, quite magnificent advancements in the project. Do the people affiliated with this project feel that a new promo video would be justified? Are the advances significant enough to merit a new video? But on the other hand, it could also be a very specific type of video, maybe focusing on the implications of, let's say, the ability to use computational design to create novel enzymes. Being able to point out concrete utility out of this project gives people, including me, huge motivational boost to crunch even more. What do you think?
23) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Minirosetta version 1.09 (Message 51947) Posted 15 Mar 2008 by Otto Post: Me too, I don't see any graphics button. Am running the newest BOINC Windows client.
24) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : DISCUSSION of Rosetta@home Journal (3) (Message 51050) Posted 28 Jan 2008 by Otto Post: Yes, that is a good idea.
25) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : DISCUSSION of Rosetta@home Journal (3) (Message 50778) Posted 17 Jan 2008 by Otto Post: When is the next entry going to appear in the official journal? It's been over a month since the last post. Has there been any exciting/interesting things that have happened since that time?
26) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Are really low energy structures worth it if the RMSD isn't so good? (Message 47991) Posted 24 Oct 2007 by Otto Post: Ok, thanks for the answers.
27) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Are really low energy structures worth it if the RMSD isn't so good? (Message 47976) Posted 23 Oct 2007 by Otto Post: What has always puzzled me is whether finding really low energy structures is worthwhile if the RMSD accompanying it isn't so spectacular. And the same could be asked conversely - is a very good RMSD worth it if the energy structure isn't? What kind of relationship is there between RMSD and energy structure in terms of relating to real-world proteins? Are the computed findings only useful for real-life action if BOTH the energy structure AND the RMSD are extremely low? (For example, the RMSD near-zero while the energy structure way, way below zero - of course depending on a given protein.)

Previous 20