What was wrong with the old seti was it broken no i don't think so so i am asking what the hell are you trying to fix it???????????????

> What was wrong with the old seti was it broken no i don't think so so i am
> asking what the hell are you trying to fix it???????????????
>

heres the url for the transition message.

http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/transition.php

No, SETI@Home was not broken in the sense that it was defective. It was however, not neccesarily doing all of the desired science. Also, UCB wanted to process the SETI data looking for a different type of signal.

To do that would have required them to build an identical infrastructure. Now, there are a number of university projects going on and everyone was re-inventing the same wheel.

With BOINC now multiple projects can be supported by the same core infrastructure.

In another sense, it was broken. Enough people were cheating on the science to get ahead in the credit race to affect the science.
jm7

> In another sense, it was broken. Enough people were cheating on the science
> to get ahead in the credit race to affect the science.


Ok, yes... I forgot about that one again ... sigh ... always something ...

1. Old seti can't do any processing beyond work units of 2 bit data from Arecibo.

2. New tapes of data have recently been gathered that have, for example, 8 bit data. Unprocessable.

3. Old seti code can't be updated on users machines.
a. If a code change was needed, they would have to post a message on the web site, and hope that eventually users would notice no work on their machines and download the new code.
b. Thats kind of what they're doing actually ;)

4. New seti can update science code to all users automatically. It can also have some users working on one group of data, and others a different data set.

5. The data sent to users has special information attached that makes it harder for cheaters to report back work they didn't really process (to get higher scores).

Seti is making changes for the better