Well I was glad to see all of the comments from you in the article. I think it did a good job of expressing to people that this is something they can do, and it's not just for scientists or "computer people" etc. So I just wanted to say thank you Jose for taking the time to participate in the interviews etc. I'm sure it was simply a matter of doubling her work to rewrite the whole article that caused her not to make the changes. Not to mention if she'd already commissioned the artists sketch with the orchids and everything. That's a keeper!

Just think of the fame you now have at the HHMI and anyone that has read it :-)

Shame about the Orchid though :(
(probably all the heat from the computers ;)

@stevea,

as AMD_is_logical said it was his opinion BUT it was also a YEAR AGO, did you not read the last part of my post ;-)
When it was posted was also not long after the project had been going.


@Jose,
Exactly, nTune that Nvidia provide for its motherboard chipsets, ASUS, ABIT all do similar wrap arounds for their motherboards, even Intel are getting in on the act.

Press a button, it goes through tests altering FSB/HTT/AGP/PCI, RAM timings, graphics cards active overclocking etc.. all at the push of a button or a tick of a box.
the problem comes when people 'trust; this and then go blaming Windows for being crappy for crashing all the time. This is still overclocking, but not in the way enthusiast overclock, They at least understand what the problems are going to be.

Myself, I overclock whatever I can, my Laptops PentiumM is overclocked from 1.7GHz to 1.9GHz. The only computer I have that is not overclocked is my older PentiumIII-m computer since I just cannot find out how to do it. I did use to overclock it's M6 graphcis card though :-D

I had peltiers in my Pentium 75 and K6's ...

Ah, but but you know how to overclock properly and safely (well unless blowing out watercooling pipes on their new computer Jose ;)

I see it this way,

If you overclock too far your results will fail, crash at some points and so you do not effect the results. Just your own experience and throughput, but hten you'll also find other parts of your computer are unstable.

Don't know what the guy that went off on one is on about, who mentioned banning overclockers?
Most homebuilt computers have software that comes with it to do the overclocking automatically now. Press go and it tries it out for you.

For a start Gil necromanced this thread which is almost a year old!

also, as pointed out, we can't send out many of the design calculations, as they require too much memory (we have to consider all 20 amino acids at all positions in the protein in some cases which involves a lot of precomputation of large interaction tables)

I am sure there would be those who would install whatever memory is required to perform those large calculations on their computers... -H.

Some of the credit given for these results is slightly high! It's a Celeron 2.8 with a RAC of over 5k:
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=260872
It looks like the decoys are being considered complete and so are getting full credit even though some are only running for a few seconds.

This one too:
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=319789

Finally Jose am I a mod? Yes I do have a mod a/c. That has nver been a secret.

My views here are as an individual participant -- that is why I am posting as R~~ not on my mod a/c.

As a matter of policy I do not act as a mod on an issue where I have already become emotionally involved as I have here, by Jose & Matt's shared kindergaterten pettiness. When I feel I have got myself sucked in, as here, I leave it to other mods to sort out. Including deleting this post if felt necessary.

When posting as an individual participant my postings are equally subject to moderation as anyone else's. And that is as it should be.

River~~

I only care about credits because they show me that my computers are continuously turning in valid work. However, I do not like doing work units for no reason. That's a waste of computer time.

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/workunit.php?wuid=37380301

So, if I'm reading this correctly, the first user had an error. The second user didn't turn it in on time so my computer got the unit. However, the second computer turned it in before I did, and so when I turned mine in a day after I got it I get 0 credits?

That's a waste of 4 hours of computing time! And I don't like crunching work for no reason if the guy who turns it in late still gets credit when I turn it in almost immediately and I get 0 credit! That 4 hours could have been used for a work unit that actually needed crunching.

Your computer claimed 50 credits and was granted 20. So what are you talking about?

Check Again Matt

Maybe it changed between when I originally posted and when you saw it, genius.

I only care about credits because they show me that my computers are continuously turning in valid work. However, I do not like doing work units for no reason. That's a waste of computer time.

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/workunit.php?wuid=37380301

So, if I'm reading this correctly, the first user had an error. The second user didn't turn it in on time so my computer got the unit. However, the second computer turned it in before I did, and so when I turned mine in a day after I got it I get 0 credits?

That's a waste of 4 hours of computing time! And I don't like crunching work for no reason if the guy who turns it in late still gets credit when I turn it in almost immediately and I get 0 credit! That 4 hours could have been used for a work unit that actually needed crunching.

...

Well yes, if the new system spoils Jose's fun that might count as a disadvantage... ;)
...

R~~

I'd wait for a CPU upgrade... Intel will come out with the new Core 2 Quad (4 cores... wow!) in november, so probably the Core 2 Duo will be cheaper

I think this is good advice.

And if you want to go all the way, you can probably get a 4-core CPU around Q1 of 2007 (AMD might release their K8L around that time too) and *really* be on the cutting edge :)

I currently have a A64 3000+@1.8ghz, and I think that a Core 2 Quad@2.6ghz would crunch about 10-12 times faster (based on quick math I did based on how many credits people with Conroes get). Wouldn't that be sweet!

Jose: actually they haven't contacted the server since Nov2005 and Dec2005 respectively

And to clear something up: I am not accusing anybody of anything, read my second post in this thread, I've said that if it were most other projects, maybe I could quickly jump to some wrong conclusions; but Rosetta seems to be a well set-up and organized project;

Jose, rosetta posted a page which has links to their account. It's the top predictions page. It does look a little funny. I didn't know users could opt out of credit. Perhaps they had their accounts zeroed for posting to many flames (giggle, chuckle).

Tony, I was going to say something nasty that started with "Kiss my ...." but decided not to take the bait ( giggle giggle )

My team opted out of close to 4 Million Credits, so yes you can opt out of credits, but the models the people whose credits were zeroed out crunched are not erased. Ditto for the people the project erased their credits.

What that profile shows is that the person has been inactive for more than 30 days, that is past CASP deadline. Maybe he changed his name and merged his computers into the new account.


All I am saying is: Be careful with the accusations and the innuendos. Need I remind you of what happened the last time some of you , yes some of you began using words like cheating in this board?

Why would that whipe out the credit. It would just move the credit around.

P.S. How do you 'opt-out' of credit? I think you're taking some of the comments to heart a little to much. They're just some questions with some sarcastic style answers and speculation ;-) Chill out, let the mods and developers sort out the real answers.

There is one host for maverick in question, last contact was Nov 2005 (just put it to show all hosts.)
Kerr Sweetin again one host but last contact Dec 2005.
Neither has any credit, thought there where some tasks returning 0 credit back then (Win98 ?) but either way that Way before CASP units started...

Perhaps they had their accounts zeroed for posting to many flames (giggle, chuckle).

Jose, rosetta posted a page which has links to their account. It's the top predictions page. It does look a little funny. I didn't know users could opt out of credit. Perhaps they had their accounts zeroed for posting to many flames (giggle, chuckle).

I just looked at the new CASP results (CASP7 target T0330 domain2), and two of the four "top predictors" have total credit of 0.00 (maverick and Kerr Sweetin), how is this possible?

Jose: those two people have TOTAL CREDIT of ZERO. Meaning they did not crunch anything, did not return any results or models!

Seems like they just randomly select "Top Predictors". Really makes you wonder doesn't it? I mean if it was a smaller, less organized project I'd be more suspicious of the project results and overall scientific value, however Rosetta seems to be a project that is "for real"; however I'd still like to hear some explanation for the "Top predictors" glitch.