I still miss the SETI clasic stats, do you think they will ever come back?

Results Received
Total CPU Time
Average CPU Time per work unit
Average results received per day
Last result returned
Registered on
SETI@home user for

Your rank out of ??? total users is
The number of users who have this rank
You have completed more work units than ??? of our users.

---

Try the statistic sites off this page.
IMHO it's a fine idea to concentrate on the core science (Boinc & Seti) @ Berkeley and leave the statistics to the eager public.

---

Gruesse vom Saenger

For questions about Boinc look in the BOINC-Wiki

> I still miss the SETI clasic stats, do you think they will ever come back?
>
> Results Received
> Total CPU Time
> Average CPU Time per work unit
> Average results received per day
> Last result returned
> Registered on
> SETI@home user for
>
> Your rank out of ??? total users is
> The number of users who have this rank
> You have completed more work units than ??? of our users.
>
just go to
the SetiSynergy site and you will see your stats as you would like to.
It is updated about daily.
This site is similar but a little different

the Boincstats.com site again updated about daily.

---

Obviously the work unit statistics are not available since they are de-emphasizing work units in favor of cobblestones so that people don't switch to projects with shorter work units just to increase their numbers. However if you want production per day, you can look at recent average credit. If you know how many cobblestones the average work unit is (around 35 for seti I think), you can still figure out approximately how many work units per day you are doing.

---

A member of The Knights Who Say NI!
For rankings, history graphs and more, check out:
My BOINC stats site

I think they should record your credits in the classic way and the "BOINC way" I dont know if its possible, but that would be a good idea.

---

> I think they should record your credits in the classic way and the "BOINC way"
> I dont know if its possible, but that would be a good idea.
>
It wouldn't be that hard to keep an incremental number of successful Boinc SETI WU's, but Seti WU's do not equal Climate Prediction WU's which don't equal Einstein units, etc. One of the reasons for Boinc is to be able to run several distributed computing projects under a common management program

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

But SETI's WU would be recorded on SETI's servers.

---

> Obviously the work unit statistics are not available since they are
> de-emphasizing work units in favor of cobblestones so that people don't switch
> to projects with shorter work units just to increase their numbers. However
> if you want production per day, you can look at recent average credit. If you
> know how many cobblestones the average work unit is (around 35 for seti I
> think), you can still figure out approximately how many work units per day you
> are doing.
>
>
Thats kinda a downer on this BOINC this cobblestone stuff sucks. The stats suck they update every 12hours. When the participant has large number of computers running it would be good to see stats updated hourly. If cobblestones dont do it they should find an alternative method of credits. The cost is high $$ to run alot of computers the only return is finding ET or credits why would they want to mess up the best part of running the program. If they could make this damn program work they should rethink this credit issue. I know Im not the only one whinning sniveling or whatever you want to call it. The participant pays the electric bill,pays Microsoft or linux, pays the cost of upgrading. I cant beleive that Seti@home doesnt want to please the user. If it wasnt for the user these programs would not exist. The Knights who say Ni has the best stats sight to bad it cant update hourly.

---

> The Knights who
> say Ni has the best stats sight to bad it cant update hourly.

The WAP stats as used by my sig update a lot more frequently. :)

---

Be lucky

Neil

> > The Knights who
> > say Ni has the best stats sight to bad it cant update hourly.
>
> The WAP stats as used by my sig update a lot more frequently. :)
>
>
>
I want in. How do I join? Can your stats check everyones stats hourly?

---

> > The WAP stats as used by my sig update a lot more frequently. :)
> >
> I want in. How do I join? Can your stats check everyones stats hourly?

You can get the stats on your phone if it's WAP-capable or you can use Petrus's sig software like I do. ;)

---

Be lucky

Neil

> > I think they should record your credits in the classic way and the "BOINC
> way"
> > I dont know if its possible, but that would be a good idea.
> >
> It wouldn't be that hard to keep an incremental number of successful Boinc
> SETI WU's, but Seti WU's do not equal Climate Prediction WU's which don't
> equal Einstein units, etc. One of the reasons for Boinc is to be able to run
> several distributed computing projects under a common management program

... and the reason for cobblestones is so that equal credit is granted for equal work. One SETI WU takes about 2 hours here, while an Einstein WU takes about 5.

LHC work units came in a couple of different flavors, with wildly different times: do you grant someone who gets three "quick" work units with the same credit as someone who gets three "slow" work units?

---

> You can get the stats on your phone if it's WAP-capable or you can use
> Petrus's sig software like I do. ;)

Petrus rocks.

---

> > > I think they should record your credits in the classic way and the
> "BOINC
> > way"
> > > I dont know if its possible, but that would be a good idea.
> > >
> > It wouldn't be that hard to keep an incremental number of successful
> Boinc
> > SETI WU's, but Seti WU's do not equal Climate Prediction WU's which
> don't
> > equal Einstein units, etc. One of the reasons for Boinc is to be able to
> run
> > several distributed computing projects under a common management program
>
> ... and the reason for cobblestones is so that equal credit is granted for
> equal work. One SETI WU takes about 2 hours here, while an Einstein WU takes
> about 5.
>
> LHC work units came in a couple of different flavors, with wildly different
> times: do you grant someone who gets three "quick" work units with the same
> credit as someone who gets three "slow" work units?
>
>
I see its complicated. At work when we are encouraged to participate in work skill programs such as 7 Habits or some other program. They start with KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid. I dont think this is an insult it means if many people have ideas divided by say 1000 employees times one million tasks put in a pie shape fractioned to possible completions in 12 months = ? We dont get that far. I think this is what has happend here many programs doing there own computations at various times and the end result is to be equall. So if this project makes it 5 years and computing power keeps going then what people will have 5 Billion cobblestones instead of lets say 200,000 work units. If this Cell type computer is produced that was mentioned in another post and it is succesfull you cant stop progress so computing power is going to increase this could possibly put averages of cobblestones in the trillions then what.

---

>
> > LHC work units came in a couple of different flavors, with wildly
> different
> > times: do you grant someone who gets three "quick" work units with the
> same
> > credit as someone who gets three "slow" work units?
> >
> >
> I see its complicated. At work when we are encouraged to participate in work
> skill programs such as 7 Habits or some other program. They start with KISS.
> Keep It Simple Stupid.

Albert Einstein said "everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler."

.... and while counting work units is simple, very few would crunch CPDN if months of processing produced a miserable five credits, while SETI produced hundreds.

---

> Albert Einstein said "everything should be made as simple as possible, but no
> simpler."
>
> .... and while counting work units is simple, very few would crunch CPDN if
> months of processing produced a miserable five credits, while SETI produced
> hundreds.

most bragging things break it up into specific projects

most people that care about credits know cpdn units are big

personally i'd like to have a wu count available to me, credits are good for whos electronic penis is wider type of questions

---

Who cares what kind of credit you get? Are you not forgetting the basics? We are in it for the science. Is that simple enough? Let the backend crediting do what they must. Just do it to find ET, or predict the weather for the next millenia, or....

Just my $.02.

---

My movie https://vimeo.com/manage/videos/502242

> I think they should record your credits in the classic way and the "BOINC way"
> I dont know if its possible, but that would be a good idea.
>

Many of the BOINC-projects have already multiple wu-types, and even SETI@home will most likely start distributing different wu-types "soon", so counting wu isn't really meaningful.

I completely agree. I do not understand all the complaining that goes on almost daily by someone about not getting credit or not getting enough credit, etc. The whole reason for anyone to want to particiapte in these projects (Seti, CPDN, Einstein, etc.) isn't for the credits. Now granted, if any of these projects gave the people running Boinc on their PCs some compensation, it would be fair to say they'd want to get as much credit as possible, but even if that were the case, the main purpose behind doing all of this is for science and furthering humanity.

I gladly crunch WU's for CPDN, Seti, Protein Prediction, and Einstein all in the name of science and furthering humanity.

I continue to add Boinc to PCs (and UD from grid.org) while ever increasing my elecricity bill, but I never complain about it. It's a small price for me to pay to help crunch WU's in hopes of finding intelligent life, scientific and medicial breakthroughs, and helping to predict weather patterns.

---

edited

---