Posts by Fuzzy Hollynoodles

1) Message boards : Number crunching : How to get a moderator to delete your post (Message 27607)
Posted 19 Sep 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Fuzzy no one was bashing Germans...a certain type of behaviour is deemed "F" cos we`re not allowed to say it, please note.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with a political party or the flamin war. It is an ordinary everday word for someone authoratively dictatorial.

This is deja vu aint it.....Best I not say that either, it`s foreign and I can`t be completely sure of the context it might be taken in.

Ok, but that was what I percieved, if I was wrong, my bad.

Yes, this board is an international board with participants from all over the world, and as I said, in my part of it, fascism is used to descibe the regimes of Stalin and Mussolini, and also Hitler. And we have still people here, who are old enough to have lived under WW2. So being called a fascist is really an insult here.

I think I've just invoked Godwin's Law, haven't I? ;-D

2) Message boards : Number crunching : How to get a moderator to delete your post (Message 27577)
Posted 19 Sep 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Calling someone a fascist is insulting also in this part of the world, I'm coming from (Denmark), and keep on bashing Germans on the past is unnecessary.

3) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Image link (Message 25965)
Posted 3 Sep 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Rendezvous with Rama

You're sure you don't mean Rendezvous with Ramen?

Sounds like a before death experience with the The Flying Spaghetti Monster.

4) Message boards : Number crunching : How to fake out the new credit system (Message 25302)
Posted 28 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Fuzzy, your actual post

links to this

The quoted post for some reason has reverted it to the correct link, <shrugs, unless tralala accidentaly altered the quote>

Sorry, I still don't see any problems, I linked to my results, my userid is 3088, I get to the right site as I intended.

But you are right ::shrug::

5) Message boards : Number crunching : How to fake out the new credit system (Message 25279)
Posted 28 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles

It doesn't.

What is wrong with the link in my post?

Hi Fuzzy

I get this message.

No access

Anders n


I don't see any differences in those two links

And I don't have my computer hidden, so it's not because you are not allowed to see my results.

Anyway, it doesn't matter.

6) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Image link (Message 25276)
Posted 28 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Talking about pirates, are you familiar with Pirate Jenny from The Threepenny Opera (Die Dreigroschenoper) by Bertolt
Brecht and Kurt Weill? Now, that's a woman, who's not to be trifled with!
To say the least!

So beware of the women, who scrub the decks! !-D

My Pirates profile and avatar:

EDIT: My profile pic seemed to stretch the thread, so I put in my Pirates avatar instead. But check out my profile pic. ;-D

7) Message boards : Number crunching : How to fake out the new credit system (Message 25272)
Posted 28 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Any others?

Yes. A couple.
And I'm not impressed by the "new and improved creditsystem". Not much gained in that. So I'm only finishing up to my 15,000 milestone, approximately 10 WU's more to go.

Correct link
It seems your claimed and granted credit are very close and with little variation. Overall you seem to get slightly more credits as with the old credits system. That's okay but why are you not happy with the new credit system?

If your CPU supports Hyperthreading you should turn it on and allow two instances of Rosetta on your machine. Your RAM seems sufficient for that and it will boost your credits/day by approximately 15%.

It doesn't.

What is wrong with the link in my post?

8) Message boards : Number crunching : How to fake out the new credit system (Message 25177)
Posted 27 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Are there any hosts that run a standard client and unmodified xml benchmarks that are getting less granted than claimed?

Yes, I have some WU's.

click here


It will be interesting to keep an eye on how the results pan out for this box.

Any others?

Yes. A couple.

And I'm not impressed by the "new and improved creditsystem". Not much gained in that. So I'm only finishing up to my 15,000 milestone, approximately 10 WU's more to go.

9) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Class of 2005 (Message 25163)
Posted 27 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
The very begining of R@H was actually extremely stable! I remember being incredably impressed with the ease my computer processed the workunits. No graphics back then though. This initial stability and the very friendly forums was what brought most of the users at the time into the project.

So you can imagine the SHOCK we all had that last week of December when we all saw our workunits crash and burn over and over for the next weeks.

Yes, when you first found out to leave the WU in memory while preempted. Back then the WU's varied a lot in time and size, so my first WU went fine, extremely unliniar but it finished well and was reported and granted credit. And then the next about 4 WU's crashed one by one, it was the "leave in memory while preempted" bug that stroke! So when I had that one solved, they started to run fine again, except for those which died of the 1% bug.

And yes, I remember the first graphic WU I had. I had it opened the whole time, and I was watching it most of the time. It looked good, it was more bright in the colors than today, as they changed the colorscheme. I liked the more bright colors back then. :-(

And the "Christmas bug", oh my God! All those which crashed one by one and were sent out all 11 times! I started to babysit my cache to check if the WU's I had were among those, so I aborted them before start. What a mess that waited for David Kim after his season holiday. And poor Moderator9 was busy those days, more busy than usual.

And yes, I also remember how Bill Michaels was attacked, so he left. He did a good job, so what a shame. :-(

10) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : New credit system: Opportunity for rewards (Message 24260)
Posted 22 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
With only 3 PCs my self, might I humbly suggest the lab tour be random? Or make other ways to earn it... like creating posts that are voted as highly informative or helpful? Or attracting the most new users to the project? Or bringing the best ideas for approaches to solving the structure problem to the Baker team? ...Love the lab tour idea. But I'd think you'd need to keep it down to like 5 people on same day every 6 months or something.

OMG, I have a flash back to the green star discussion over at Seti. The green star was implemented to reward moneydonors, and suddenly all kind of requests of colored stars popped up. There was even suggestions with long list of icons of different colors to reward postnumbers on the NC board, postnumbers in Q&A, numbers of articles to the BOINC Wiki, etc.

And the discussions of who is better than who flared up, were moneydonors better and more entitled than others, etc. .

I think we already have enough of this with the RAC.

11) Message boards : Number crunching : Thread Delete: Why I am pulling my machines out. (Message 24221)
Posted 22 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Thread Delete: Why I am pulling my machines out.

Blame Misfit!

Don't we allways? :-P

12) Message boards : Number crunching : Why are discussions about Rosetta taking place on other boards? (Message 24219)
Posted 22 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
I fully agree with Fuzzy Hollynoodles!
Something went wrong here...

Blame Misfit!


Yeah, we blame you in all projects. ;-D

13) Message boards : Number crunching : A Challenge (Message 24191)
Posted 21 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles

The claim was that SETI CLASSIC science was compromised, not SETI BOINC science. Anyone that attempts to compromise SETI BOINC science gets 0 credits for his work.

And those, who cheated with the credits in Classic Seti, were picked down by Matt Lebofsky after Seti Classic closed.

14) Message boards : Number crunching : A Challenge (Message 24140)
Posted 21 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
What it is interesting is that none of the great even field because optimizers are evil club have responded to the challenge. Of course they wont. The challenge will show them for what they are non producers who boudmouth those who can.

IMO any post threatening (promising) to take control of any part of the boards is out of order. Would you not agree if it were another team threatening to do the same?

You shout about non-producers airing their opinions - pot/kettle? It has no relation to how valid someone's opinion is.

As for the backdating debate - I don't believe any subject should be banned from rational discussion. The ONLY reason is because it has been the subject of many flames. If there were no flame wars and a rational debate was possible then it's a valid subject to discuss. As a subject it's as valid as any!

As MM requested, lets keep this thread civil ;)
[edit] that last bit isn't just to Jose!

I have a very slow P4. For many weeks my machine was the poster child for everything that could go wrong with a work unit and it got the rightfull name of sloth.
If I have the credits I have it was because a friend tested his water cooled, ocd opty system using my account.

Se I know my contribution number wise is small. I accept that , I dont accuse peope that can crunch more than I because the have more and better equipmeny than me of cheats. Nor I claim the world is unfair.

I dont produce high numbers because the physical limitations of my system not because I am spread thin in gazzillion projects. I dont claim a conspiracy aginst my sloth as many here claim against their machines.

Right now, I am not producing numbers becasuse I stoped crunching for Rosetta so my numbers are going to drop more in relation to others.

You missed my point Jose- whether I agree with your opinions or not, I accept that you put a lot of effort into this project. You're not the biggest producer, but your production is beneficial to the project all the same. The way your previous posts read to me is that you're belitteling others based on their production rates, and yet from my point of view you're doing exactly what you accuse them of, from the same position.

I was here back in the beginning, where it actually was a challenge to crunch Rosetta WU's. There was the 1% bug, the stay-in-memory-while-preempted bug, the freeze bug, other kind of bugs, and we had to tweak our settings just to be able to return valid results. Numerous was the times I had to exit my BOINC manager and start it again, sometimes even reboot my computer, in my attempts to "jumpstart" a frozen WU. It became a little easier when the graphics were developed (I still remember my first graphic WU. I had the graphics open all the time and I actually sat and looked at it from start to upload), as we then could see if a WU was alive or not, so we didn't have to abort a WU which seemed stuck. I remember the "Christmass bug", the flawed WU's that was sent out just before the devs left for their seasons holiday, so they were sent out all 11 times, as there was no devs there to kill them.

If anybody here dares to question my dedication to this project based on my RAC, I have only two words to say to that person, and that is not "Merry Christmas"!

15) Message boards : Number crunching : A Challenge (Message 24133)
Posted 21 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Dannny: it can be done. I know I can be done. I have seen it done.
By the way, even some of the strongest Boinc suppportes have claimed here that in SETI even the science part ( science , not the credits) was tampered with. So under open source the science can be tampered.

So that is one of the reasons why I am so in favor of close coding. The credit aspects as well as the science aspects of the application has to be closed.

The problem with your statement is, that it was closed-source SETI "classic", that back in the v2-days had the 1st. big cheating-scandal, there a couple of users "helped" Ars Technica to reach #1, for so jumping to another team and AFAIK "helped" them to #1, before they themselves announced they was cheating. The cheat was to download wu, and return a result with no detected signals, since back in the v2-days 10% or something of results was returned with no reported signals, this was an easy "cheat".

Now, in the later validation-step it's very easy to spot these bogus results, but one of the many weaknesses is that SETI "classic" credited all results, that they 6 months or so later failed validation didn't influence the crediting...

v3 and later seti-clients started to include best-spike and so on, meaning even if no signal strong enough to report, there was still 1-4 reported signals in all results. This stopped the v2-cheat from working, but there AFAIK was made another cheating client, there a result with bogus signals was returned-back...

Not sure if this was widely used, since the most "popular" cheat was also detected, due to a weakness in server-backend the same user could return the same result many times and get credit for each time returned. A variation of this cheat was to crunch result to 99%, copy the progress, and just change user-id and finish crunching and return the same result under multiple user-accounts...

SETI/BOINC on the other hand is much harder to cheat, since here only results that passes the validation-step gets any credit. Since validation is a neccessary step for SETI@home, stopping anyone trying to cheat at the same time is a "free" bonus, due to the normal credit-rules.

At the time wu is validated, credit for wu is decided based on how many of the results passed validation:
1; If only 2 passed validation, lowest claimed to all.
2; If 3 or more, remove highest and lowest claimed, and average the rest.
Any later-returned results that also passes validation gets the same credit, no re-evaluation of credit is done.

Now, this doesn't stop anyone from trying to cheat by claiming 1000 or something, but, as long as not 2 users crunching the same wu tries to cheat, the 1000-claim is discarded and has little or no effect on the granted credit.

While the BOINC-benchmark can give atleast 5x variation in claims, and someone trying to cheat possibly could get a small advantage, for Seti_Enhanced it's much harder. This since Seti_Enhanced "counts flops", and I've seen 1% variation in claims between results for same wu, but in majority of instances the variance is below 0.1%... Meaning, even if someone does increase their claims with 2%, it can be detected server-side.

Well, the "flops-counting" only works with BOINC-client v5.2.6 or later, meaning as long as older clients isn't stopped from returning work you'll still ocassionally have 2 benchmark-claims deciding granted credit. This is really the same for someone trying to cheat, you need 2 cheaters crunching the same wu to really influence the granted credit.

This basically means, as long as not over 50% of the users is trying to cheat, the quorum-system will stop the cheaters from getting any big advantage from their cheating-attempts. But, if 50% is cheating, you've got a problem regardless...

Looking on BOINC total production, Einstein@home and CPDN uses server-side crediting, meaning for these projects it doesn't matter if user is trying to cheat on the credit or not. Seti_Enhanced "counts flops", and stops cheating-attempts by the quorum-system. A quick look on BoincStats reveals these projects accounts for 84% of last days production.

Rosetta@home accounts for 9.8% of the production, and is now also switching to fairly cheat-resistant crediting.

This leaves many smaller BOINC-projects that relies on the BOINC-benchmark, these has together less than 6% of production. Of these again, majority relies on the quorum-system for deciding crediting, meaning anyone trying to cheat is at a disadvantage...

Thank you Ingleside for clearing this up here.

16) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Visual Relief...Edit message board preferences (Message 24024)
Posted 21 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
I admit that long signatures and photos as signatures bug me. They prejudice my opinions of what members post.

I have selected "Hide avatar images", "Hide signatures", and "Show images as links" so I can read without all of the visual distractions, and hopefully I can be less prejudiced.

Am I the only one?

No, not for sigs. Which browser do you have? If you have Mozilla Firefox, you can get the Adblock extention, which can block unwanted pictures. So if I see somebody with some specially annoying sig-pics, I simply block them with Adblock. Text-sigs are not so annoying, IMHO, except those with huge font-size and weird colors.

I don't have images shown as links here, but I have on the Seti boards. And I like to see people's avatars, they makes it easier to see posts by certain people, and you can scroll up or down fast and only look for the avatar to find a post.

As for the postersize sigs, if you participate in many projects, your stats-sig is long. But then again, with Adblock I can block those which are half a page long.

I like very much myself to have a sentence in my sig also, a statement of some kind, and right now I have a quote by myself "I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world", which I think describes me as I am, besides my stats-sig. I don't know if some thinks it's annoying, but I don't care.

17) Message boards : Number crunching : Report Problems with Rosetta Version 5.25 (Message 24013)
Posted 21 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
I got one too:


stderr out

Forkert funktion. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
# random seed: 1690643
# cpu_run_time_pref: 10800
ERROR:: Exit at: line:401


18) Message boards : Number crunching : A Challenge (Message 24000)
Posted 21 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles

Against me? or with me?<BG>
I can see a problem developing. My challenge was to the "vocal" group here that campaigned against the optimised files and used the "C" word in relation ot XS.
The point was to show that I as one person was producing more than the entire group of them.Orginally I named these people but was asked by Ethan not to so the issue is being clouded.
Something else that needs to be said here: WE have a problem with children playing games with the + and - boxes below each post in an effort to elininate posts from the forum. That's dirty pool gentlemen and if it isn't stopped I will bring 200 people here in a heartbeat and destroy this voting system before you can blink. That is no threat, that is a statement of fact. If we're going to get down and dirty here, I'm more than willing to do so..
It's your decision on how this is played. Clean or dirty.

Planning a minus attack? That's dirty. And yes, I have noticed the minusings of mine and other's posts here.

Ive been doing some reading over at the rosy boards, and Ive found some very interesting (disturbing) facts.

It would seem that our opposition is far more effective at exploiting the shortcomings of the boinc forum format. Specifically, the ratings feature, which is much like a unseen moderation.

Ive made a total of 13 posts on the rosy boards, most of them civil, germaine and speaking directly to the facts which contradict our opponents and not a one remains. Not one.

Whether or not the truth is on our side, we are losing this battle as it currently stands. Any contradictory post is either getting deleted via this mechanism, or the threads become so flame filled they are hidden. The result is very one-sided, and the "jury" isnt getting the complete picture.

The simple fact is were (including others outside this team) being out BOINC'd by the boincers. Something has to be done about this. The price of failure being this teams reputation, and our viewpoints which are being silently squelched and tarnished simultaneously.


I wondered what the point was of the ratings system other than to vote what you thought about it. I'm glad you posted this. It shows that a group can eliminate any opposing view just by voting against it enough times in a short timeframe.
Thanks pal!

Responding is only going to make things worse and is pretty futile now. I'm reporting every post I see from the few from now on I have hit the red "X" on 3 of saenger's posts today and I advise all to do the same, they must take notice now...

why don't we just delete every post on their forum :p

Maybe David Kim should disable the ratings again? Before the children start to play.

Interesting reading on that board, by the way!

19) Message boards : Number crunching : Simple boinc installer (Message 23908)
Posted 20 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Do new laptops (face it, kids come with shiny new machines) have any type of heat protection? As in, if it hits a high temp, it will shut the machine down to protect the laptop.

Yes, they do.

And I have crunched Rosetta and all my other projects on this computer, a Fujitsu-Siemens laptop, since July 2004. Before, when it stood directly on my desk, the temperature on the processor was 50 - 53 degrees Celsius, but after I bought a small wire rack for it to stand on for better air circulation, the processor temperature dropped about 3 degrees. And when I sit in my big chair with it, I'll have to keep the ventilationholes away from my legs, as it's too hot.

20) Message boards : Number crunching : Boinc clients (Message 23715)
Posted 20 Aug 2006 by Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
I have a question: What does Crunch3r think about using his optimized client on R@H?

I read his words and meaning loud and clear! CoughCheatingAhem...

Next 20

©2024 University of Washington