Lambert Simnel
One across
Blazer6 said:
That seems a bit of a leap of faith. Do you really believe that ?
Be a Superhero with TeamCFC. Help us perform miracles.
- Thread starter Abaddon
- Start date
- Status
That seems a bit of a leap of faith. Do you really believe that ?
I think the whole concept of Distributed Computing for research is worthy of support.
There are feedback benefits, not only is the Folding group releasing results, but there are more groups thinking about releasing DC projects.
There are feedback benefits, not only is the Folding group releasing results, but there are more groups thinking about releasing DC projects.
Mulholland
Happy New Year!!!!
Lambert Simnel said:
Seeing that it takes about as much juice to power a processor as a standard lightbulb, yes I think it's worth the effort. So keep you light on, It might just change the world.
Sahkuhnder
Delusions of grandeur
Lambert Simnel said:
I'm not certain how much data you're looking for but this forum has this thread which kind of asks your question.
Links also to folding Science, Results, and Papers.
Stanford Results page - samples said:
There is a lot of very technical data in those papers for anyone into that sort of thing. I glanced at them and they are all way, way over my level of understanding of the topic.
Lambert Simnel said:
This question in the FAQs says it costs about $0.36 per day for electricity, or about $10/month to have your computer running full bore 24/7. I'm certainly willing to donate a little electricity in order to help the research of people who have devoted their lives curing mankind's worst diseases.
I look at it as the same as killing a tree to provide Einstein with a supply of pencils and paper for his computations. The greater good is definitely being served.
Lambert Simnel
One across
Thanks for the replies. I suspect it maybe needs a little faith which perhaps I don't have.
Sakh, I had a look at some of the links you posted (thanks for those). But the "similar question" was being answered by people who are believers, and wasn't actually that convincing for those of us who are agnostics for this process.
As regards the number of research papers published, well, like you, I'm not well placed to understand the significance of each of these. I had a look at the first dozen or so, though, and many (most ?) of them (27, 31, 32, 37, 38, 42, 43 ?) seemed to be about refining the mathematical approach to F@H, rather than actually describing anything discovered by F@H. Couldn't be sure that any of those I looked at were actually doing much more than validating and improving the F@H apporoach (maybe 41, 44, 45 ?).
On donating electricity - well, I have no problem with anyone choosing to give their time or money to any charitable cause of their choice. However, at the same time there are several campaigns (in the UK at least) trying to encourage people to be more energy efficient on the basis that a big difference can come from many people making a small saving in their energy use - also, a number of large corporates are trying to get staff to turn off PCs, monitors etc at night, and printers over the weekend, allegedly as part of a green agenda, (though probably more as a cost saving).
Don't misunderstand me - I'm not trying to tell you that you're wrong. I guess I'm just interested if any of you have environmental concerns (actually, I'm sure Sophie has) and whether running as many PCs as possible for something like this sits well with the Green mantra of "think global, act local".
Anyone know if SETI is still going ?
Sakh, I had a look at some of the links you posted (thanks for those). But the "similar question" was being answered by people who are believers, and wasn't actually that convincing for those of us who are agnostics for this process.
As regards the number of research papers published, well, like you, I'm not well placed to understand the significance of each of these. I had a look at the first dozen or so, though, and many (most ?) of them (27, 31, 32, 37, 38, 42, 43 ?) seemed to be about refining the mathematical approach to F@H, rather than actually describing anything discovered by F@H. Couldn't be sure that any of those I looked at were actually doing much more than validating and improving the F@H apporoach (maybe 41, 44, 45 ?).
On donating electricity - well, I have no problem with anyone choosing to give their time or money to any charitable cause of their choice. However, at the same time there are several campaigns (in the UK at least) trying to encourage people to be more energy efficient on the basis that a big difference can come from many people making a small saving in their energy use - also, a number of large corporates are trying to get staff to turn off PCs, monitors etc at night, and printers over the weekend, allegedly as part of a green agenda, (though probably more as a cost saving).
Don't misunderstand me - I'm not trying to tell you that you're wrong. I guess I'm just interested if any of you have environmental concerns (actually, I'm sure Sophie has) and whether running as many PCs as possible for something like this sits well with the Green mantra of "think global, act local".
Anyone know if SETI is still going ?
Yeah, SETI is still going under the BOINC name. There are a host of applications though that fall under the BOINC umbrella.
ironduck
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2002
- Messages
- 6,561
Lambert, if you check through the publications list there are a number that are not about the process itself, but rather about actual protein folding.
As for the energy concern - that is similar to asking whether science in general should be allowed to use computers or should be relegated to paper and pencil. The distributed computing projects are simply supercomputers at work. The fact that it's unfortunate that we're currently getting most of our electricity through problematic means is a different discussion in my opinion. In that regard, pushing for non-polluting energy sources simply goes hand in hand with pushing for more scientific research in my opinion. Should we postpone all research until all our energy is non-polluting? That in itself would be problematic since we need science (and heavy computer calculations) to increase the yield of those sources.
I don't think it's an either-or, rather a matter of opting-in on both accounts.
As for the energy concern - that is similar to asking whether science in general should be allowed to use computers or should be relegated to paper and pencil. The distributed computing projects are simply supercomputers at work. The fact that it's unfortunate that we're currently getting most of our electricity through problematic means is a different discussion in my opinion. In that regard, pushing for non-polluting energy sources simply goes hand in hand with pushing for more scientific research in my opinion. Should we postpone all research until all our energy is non-polluting? That in itself would be problematic since we need science (and heavy computer calculations) to increase the yield of those sources.
I don't think it's an either-or, rather a matter of opting-in on both accounts.
scienide09
Regular lurker
Hey, this is a good conversation. (And a way to keep the thread alive.)
I do have personal concerns about leaving my home computer on while I'm at work, simply so I can cruch away at my BOINC projects. I worry about it as a waste of energy, and the environmental impact. But I don't always leave it on, and I certainly don't run 24/7.
Part of me wats to echo what others have already said - that it takes some concessions to make great leaps forward. On the other hand, it can be a bit of a moral quagmire for those dedicated to a/the green agenda.
It's not really a justification, but at least I can find some solace in the knowledge that in most other parts of my life, I'm pretty environmentally responsible. For instance, I don't drive or even own a car, and I walk or cycle before taking public transit - a significant enery savings right there.
Like Kyoto, where high-emission countries can buy emission 'credits' from low-emission countries to erase their above-level output. It's not a real reduction, but at least my net impact is balanced, rather than constantly increasing.
My real test will be when I buy a new computer (hopefully within the next year). At that point, will I completely retire my old system (recycle it), or keep it around for occasional use and dedicated crunching?
I do have personal concerns about leaving my home computer on while I'm at work, simply so I can cruch away at my BOINC projects. I worry about it as a waste of energy, and the environmental impact. But I don't always leave it on, and I certainly don't run 24/7.
Part of me wats to echo what others have already said - that it takes some concessions to make great leaps forward. On the other hand, it can be a bit of a moral quagmire for those dedicated to a/the green agenda.
It's not really a justification, but at least I can find some solace in the knowledge that in most other parts of my life, I'm pretty environmentally responsible. For instance, I don't drive or even own a car, and I walk or cycle before taking public transit - a significant enery savings right there.
Like Kyoto, where high-emission countries can buy emission 'credits' from low-emission countries to erase their above-level output. It's not a real reduction, but at least my net impact is balanced, rather than constantly increasing.
My real test will be when I buy a new computer (hopefully within the next year). At that point, will I completely retire my old system (recycle it), or keep it around for occasional use and dedicated crunching?
If you're not using your computer anyway, then the additional energy from crunching is added to the 'being on' cost - and leaving the computer on for pure crunching might then be seen as inefficient.
But, for those who have the computer on anyway, the marginal cost is likely low compared to the benefit. As well, people can optimise by switching to a DC project they personally endorse.
But, for those who have the computer on anyway, the marginal cost is likely low compared to the benefit. As well, people can optimise by switching to a DC project they personally endorse.
Lambert Simnel
One across
ironduck said:
Reasonable points Ironduck. I guess I am pretty sceptical about the folding approach and rather suspect it's a potential resource looking to be a solution to a big problem. The mentioning of SETI was at least partly meant as a nod in that direction. Both F@H and SETI seem to be adopted by people eager to be seen to be doing something (perhaps unfairly, it appears as though it's a replacement for actually financial commitment in mnay cases), and I guess I see echoes of that in the over-the-top titles which these threads have to labour under (superhero ? cure cancer ? perform miracles ? yeah...).
Of course, that doesn't mean that the motivation of all or even many of the folders is dubious, and, regardless of people's motivations, if they're doing something good and worthwhile then I doubt if it matters too much. So it probably principally goes back to my scepticism about the approach, rather than anything else - if I believe there to be little benefit in this approach, then logically I'd be shutting off PCs, not keeping them running.
ironduck
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2002
- Messages
- 6,561
I'm not sure I follow.. the enthusiasm surrounding this thread is an attempt to drum up more participants. The reason for that is obviously that we think it's a viable research project, and as such the available data is increased in direct relation to the amount of processing power.
It's perfectly fine to be sceptical about the project, in fact I encourage people to look into these projects before signing up
It's perfectly fine to be sceptical about the project, in fact I encourage people to look into these projects before signing up
As well, with our escalating computing power, we would like to encourage (even inefficiently) groups that seek to harness that power to work on research programs.
The formulas they're developing today are going to be used in the future. Even if running a formula is slow and rough today, that's a problem that's destined to go down. But building the formulas is probably the important part.
(Hell, the work we're doing today will likely be the same work that will be done in 2022 with a 'normal' laptop of the day)
The formulas they're developing today are going to be used in the future. Even if running a formula is slow and rough today, that's a problem that's destined to go down. But building the formulas is probably the important part.
(Hell, the work we're doing today will likely be the same work that will be done in 2022 with a 'normal' laptop of the day)
Ball Lightning
www.sporedum.net
I've joined!!
and in appreciation of you doing so im going to point out the glaring error in your sig 
Kan' Sharuminar
Fluffy
Bah, if one more person jopins, we're one better off 
JonnyB
Workaholic
Well I finished my first WU!
I happened to be watching when it finished, it set up for the next one and as soon as it started working I got the message F@H has encountered an error and needs to close. and it shut down.
So I restarted it and it's working again.
I happened to be watching when it finished, it set up for the next one and as soon as it started working I got the message F@H has encountered an error and needs to close. and it shut down.
So I restarted it and it's working again.
Sahkuhnder
Delusions of grandeur
@ Lambert -
You do make a very valid point about wishing to promote conservation, but I always try to divide consumption into two groups, use and waste. I have no problem using electricity provided it is for a purpose, like say for cooling my house on a hot day. When my kids leave the door wide open and let the A/C-cooled air pour outside into the great outdoors that is wasting. There is also wasting from inaction, like if you buy fruit and let it spoil instead of eating it in a timely manner or if you fail to give your car a tune-up so it uses more gas and has a shorter lifespan. I actually see leaving a computer turned off and being unproductive as wasting an opportunity, as I see the electricity as a use to science and mankind, not as a waste without purpose.
Every protein folding that is solved is permanently added to the database that is human knowledge.
Here may be a deeper thought to consider. What about the waste that is the loss (or incapacitation) of a human life? Ask yourself how much time, energy and resources go into the development and training of an adult human being in the modern world? How much food was grown? How many hours were devoted to education and teaching? How many resources were spent clothing, transporting, entertaining, etc. while that person grew to become an adult? How many people gave up large chunks of their own lives, also equally expensive to develop, by spending their time and effort to see that person raised throughout the childhood years?
Now that the investment has been made and a healthy and productive member of society is finally making their own contributions, along comes Parkinson's, cancer, etc. and ends all that. And the diseases that Stanford are working on aren't just any illnesses, they are really nasty ones with slow ugly deaths after long, expensive fights to prolong the day of demise. Have you ever seen the movie "The Notebook"? Have you ever watched a loved one ravaged by cancer wither away right before your eyes and been unable to help? To say this process is a 'terrible waste' barely begins to describe the loss to the stricken individual, to their family, and to society at large.
I'm not a molecular biologist. I am a however a firm believer in the process of finding an expert for whatever your project is, doing your best to give them the resources that they need to do their job, and then delegating to them the task at hand. If the goal is to solve and eliminate these diseases, and the experts at Stanford say they need computing time and that using my computer will help, I have no reason to question them and am in favor of giving them the resources that they need to accomplish their goal, and then leaving them to work on the project at whatever rate it occurs for as long as needed.
If you try to cut down the waste in your life that is admirable of you. My point though is to be sure not to cut down on the legitimate use of resources in the process. In this case letting opportunity pass by (unused computer) in an effort at small conservation (energy savings) at the expense of a much greater loss (human life).
--------
You certainly seem to be getting into the spirit of things.
Don't worry about the shutdown as it is rare and only happens with the graphical client and only when the display window is actively open during the upload/download process between WUs. Stanford knows about it and has an explanation (they blame Microsoft) but basically if you leave your system to fold unattended just close the window that shows the folding data and you should be fine.
And a welcome to Ball Lightning.
You do make a very valid point about wishing to promote conservation, but I always try to divide consumption into two groups, use and waste. I have no problem using electricity provided it is for a purpose, like say for cooling my house on a hot day. When my kids leave the door wide open and let the A/C-cooled air pour outside into the great outdoors that is wasting. There is also wasting from inaction, like if you buy fruit and let it spoil instead of eating it in a timely manner or if you fail to give your car a tune-up so it uses more gas and has a shorter lifespan. I actually see leaving a computer turned off and being unproductive as wasting an opportunity, as I see the electricity as a use to science and mankind, not as a waste without purpose.
Every protein folding that is solved is permanently added to the database that is human knowledge.
Here may be a deeper thought to consider. What about the waste that is the loss (or incapacitation) of a human life? Ask yourself how much time, energy and resources go into the development and training of an adult human being in the modern world? How much food was grown? How many hours were devoted to education and teaching? How many resources were spent clothing, transporting, entertaining, etc. while that person grew to become an adult? How many people gave up large chunks of their own lives, also equally expensive to develop, by spending their time and effort to see that person raised throughout the childhood years?
Now that the investment has been made and a healthy and productive member of society is finally making their own contributions, along comes Parkinson's, cancer, etc. and ends all that. And the diseases that Stanford are working on aren't just any illnesses, they are really nasty ones with slow ugly deaths after long, expensive fights to prolong the day of demise. Have you ever seen the movie "The Notebook"? Have you ever watched a loved one ravaged by cancer wither away right before your eyes and been unable to help? To say this process is a 'terrible waste' barely begins to describe the loss to the stricken individual, to their family, and to society at large.
I'm not a molecular biologist. I am a however a firm believer in the process of finding an expert for whatever your project is, doing your best to give them the resources that they need to do their job, and then delegating to them the task at hand. If the goal is to solve and eliminate these diseases, and the experts at Stanford say they need computing time and that using my computer will help, I have no reason to question them and am in favor of giving them the resources that they need to accomplish their goal, and then leaving them to work on the project at whatever rate it occurs for as long as needed.
If you try to cut down the waste in your life that is admirable of you. My point though is to be sure not to cut down on the legitimate use of resources in the process. In this case letting opportunity pass by (unused computer) in an effort at small conservation (energy savings) at the expense of a much greater loss (human life).
--------
JonnyB said:
You certainly seem to be getting into the spirit of things.
Don't worry about the shutdown as it is rare and only happens with the graphical client and only when the display window is actively open during the upload/download process between WUs. Stanford knows about it and has an explanation (they blame Microsoft) but basically if you leave your system to fold unattended just close the window that shows the folding data and you should be fine.
And a welcome to Ball Lightning.
- Status
Similar threads
