I will never understand why some average value could not be assigned to my SAH classic account to bring it into line with the new BOINC program.

I believe I may have found a solution about SETI credits which would please everyone. If I have turned in ANY work units under the old SAH Classic, why couldn't my BOINC credits also be added onto the old classic credits? I would still be starting with zero on BOINC, and one work unit on BOINC would be added to my Classic account every time I turn one in. That way my stats for Classic would still continue to accrue.

If this cannot be done, how do I go about removing BOINC from the one machine which I installed it on as a test platform?

One Classic WU = ?? That's not possible. There were bad WUs, cheating, and other issues with the WUs that are hard to describe. You want to give credit to those who cheated? There is not an easy way to tell who cheated, either.

As for adding 1 BOINC WU, well, I have done WUs in 5 seconds to say 75,000 seconds and many numbers in between. How can a 5 second one be counted the same as a 75,000 second one? Just not fesible. Plus there is no way to backtrack and see how many I have done since I started 1.5 years ago. So, those people who got on the bandwagon early would lose out.

There is no way to please everyone. They did the best they could do and started everyone new on a new style of project. That way everyone is even. You have your old credits shown in your account, you do not lose that. People are proud of you, because you did that work. It was pioneering. Now it's time to move on.

If you really want to uninstall, use the Control Panel, Add or Remove Programs option.

---

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

If this cannot be done, how do I go about removing BOINC from the one machine which I installed it on as a test platform?

run the installer again and select the option "remove".

Nobody really cares about the cheaters. The cheaters know who they are and they know their statistics are all a sham. Like everyone else, I have crunched WU's in as little as 5 seconds, and long ago, when cpu speeds were a lot less, some WU's took a full 24 hours. Also, the seti program has been modified several times which makes crunching the numbers take more or less time. While my average time now shows as 4 hours, 57+ minutes, my actual average cpu time was down to somewhere around 2 hours.

No disrespect to the person who got on the bandwagon 1.5 years ago (and there is no way to backtrack and see how many WU's he's actually done) I got on the original SAH bandwagon well over 6 years ago so I really lose out. Too bad the people at Seti didn't think about this a little more before they implemented the new BOINC.

If everyone in the classic SAH decides NOT to support BOINC in its present format, BOINC will be the big loser.

---

BOINC is already not a looser, as you state it will become. There are hundred of thousands of people already running it, with approximately 2.5 machines per person, and growing fast.

You did not lose your old statistics, you still have them. Look at my signature, I have Classic proudly displayed with my small contribution.

I do not understand how you can compare the two. They are too different to compare. If you got on the volunteer with helping with the new project, and had a say so, like many did, maybe something could have been different, but after 2+ years, you change now, more people will rebel then are.

Life is about changes. They software has changed, and is continuing to change. There will be an enhance BOINC version of SETI soon to be released. These results will take 4-10 times longer. Still going to count these 1 for 1? No way. Then when the new antenna comes online that is multi-beam, how long are those going to take? Just no way.

Good luck in your future endevors, since it sounds like you have given up something that is so worth doing.

---

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

Nobody really cares about the cheaters.

Please don't try to speak for everyone. Cheating was a big concern, as they (among other things) wasted the time, bandwidth, server space of the project with false and duplicate work.

No disrespect to the person who got on the bandwagon 1.5 years ago (and there is no way to backtrack and see how many WU's he's actually done) I got on the original SAH bandwagon well over 6 years ago so I really lose out. Too bad the people at Seti didn't think about this a little more before they implemented the new BOINC.

Again, you're not paying attention. Check out the dates of some of the people who are proponents... WinterKnight and Angus have dates from the start of the project, even mine is six weeks before yours, and some who show later start dates do so because they've lost passwords or old email addresses and couldn't easily link. SETI thought long and hard about the implementation of credit tracking, and did consider the loud complaints of cheating, of short work units vs. full ones, as well as the problems of making a change like this.

If everyone in the classic SAH decides NOT to support BOINC in its present format, BOINC will be the big loser.

Many from Classic have made their choice already, to continue to support SETI@Home in its new format. If you decide to continue, experienced users in the new form will be happy to help if you have problems. If you do not, fare you well in whatever projects you next choose to join.

MJ

---

There is no fair way to equate Seti-Classic work with Boinc-Seti.
The old Seti-Classic users will always complain their long service has been denigrated by Boinc users.
The long time Boinc users will say, it's about time you showed up, where were you when we went though all the growing pain of making this software workable for you.

The current Credit system is as fair as it's going to get, and only minor tweaks will occur. That debate was done with last year and this is the compromise that was arrived at. Too bad that you weren't here when the decision was made. The early Boinc volunteer were and now the decision is final. You can either accept it or move on.

Seti is getting ready for another major change which will create even more complaints. One of the major reasons for Boinc is that it simplifies the implementation of new core software. And this is coming in the next couple of weeks.

The new application will have much longer crunch times (and a longer reporting period) because of the refinement to the science. People are going to complain that their old CPU can no longer do the work.

I say too bad. You can't drive a Model T on the highway, that's life. Look for another project that your CPU can handle. That's one of the many advantages of Boinc. There are many more choices made available and more are coming.

If none of these option appeal to you personally, all I can only say TOO BAD.

There are currently 330,000 people with more than 660,000 computers active contributing part of their CPU's time to Boinc-Seti, and these number are growing daily.

Losing one volunteer is not going to impact the project. People come and go all the time. That's the nature of volunteerism. We would rather that people stay and contribute BUT...... That too is life.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

I do not understand how you can compare the two. They are too different to compare.

It's quite easy , actually. SETI and SETI/BOINC have been doing the SAME science on the same WUs. It's been one continuous project under two platforms.

Discounting the cheats, we all got the same WU credits under SETI - 1=1=1 - for whatever we did. The scoring didn't change when the client had 'extra' science added to curb the bandwidth usage years ago. Most of us kept crunching. UCB wasn't interested enough to do anything to remove the cheaters' scores, so we live with them.

Now, the SETI project is going into a new phase - different WUs for the first time evaluated with a drastically different science set, and possibly data from different sources.

Why not call everything up to this point SETI-1 and start over with SETI-2? This would include merging SETI and SETI/BOINC scores by multiplying the WU count times a constant, since going from credits back to WU count isn't possible. Then EVERYONE who crunched for SETI-1 could compare their scores and standings. The early BOINC-r folks would lose their advantage, but so would the SETI holdouts. We would ALL be compared equally for the project.

Everyone is now together for the first time in years, and will doing the the same science (but different from SETI-1). Start over with SETI-2 with everyone at 0.

---

I do not understand how you can compare the two. They are too different to compare.

It's quite easy , actually. SETI and SETI/BOINC have been doing the SAME science on the same WUs. It's been one continuous project under two platforms.

Discounting the cheats, we all got the same WU credits under SETI - 1=1=1 - for whatever we did. The scoring didn't change when the client had 'extra' science added to curb the bandwidth usage years ago. Most of us kept crunching. UCB wasn't interested enough to do anything to remove the cheaters' scores, so we live with them.

Now, the SETI project is going into a new phase - different WUs for the first time evaluated with a drastically different science set, and possibly data from different sources.

Why not call everything up to this point SETI-1 and start over with SETI-2? This would include merging SETI and SETI/BOINC scores by multiplying the WU count times a constant, since going from credits back to WU count isn't possible. Then EVERYONE who crunched for SETI-1 could compare their scores and standings. The early BOINC-r folks would lose their advantage, but so would the SETI holdouts. We would ALL be compared equally for the project.

Everyone is now together for the first time in years, and will doing the the same science (but different from SETI-1). Start over with SETI-2 with everyone at 0.

You just aren't getting the message. The debate is over, dead, finis.
The final decision has already been made. This is the system that has been put in place and it works for Seti and allows symmetry with the other Boinc projects and there will be no backward steps.

Now, you just need to learn to accepted it.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

It's not going to happen, give it up. It's been argued for 2+ years, and it's already been decided. No amount of whining will get it changed.

---

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

Why not call everything up to this point SETI-1 and start over with SETI-2? This would include merging SETI and SETI/BOINC scores by multiplying the WU count times a constant, since going from credits back to WU count isn't possible. Then EVERYONE who crunched for SETI-1 could compare their scores and standings. The early BOINC-r folks would lose their advantage, but so would the SETI holdouts. We would ALL be compared equally for the project.

Everyone is now together for the first time in years, and will doing the the same science (but different from SETI-1). Start over with SETI-2 with everyone at 0.

This would surely annoy people (like me) who read the BOINC home page, stating BOINC was the future and classic would be phased out, and switched early.

Regards Hans

P.S: Sorry for the long sentence. :o)

---

This would surely annoy people (like me) who read the BOINC home page, stating BOINC was the future and classic would be phased out, and switched early.

No more so than the people continuing to faithfully crunch using the original client, completely unaware of BOINC until the email hit their inbox. Not everyone (and probably a LOW percentage) reads this or the old boards.

All the scores for SETI-1 should be combined, whether they were done using the original client of the BOINC client.

---

This would surely annoy people (like me) who read the BOINC home page, stating BOINC was the future and classic would be phased out, and switched early.

Regards Hans

P.S: Sorry for the long sentence. :o)

Ditto! I could have easily obtained 50k had I chose to be a diehard and stick with classic. Now those that did stay somehow think they should not only have classic credit, but get BOINC credit, too?

Terry

This would surely annoy people (like me) who read the BOINC home page, stating BOINC was the future and classic would be phased out, and switched early.

No more so than the people continuing to faithfully crunch using the original client, completely unaware of BOINC until the email hit their inbox. Not everyone (and probably a LOW percentage) reads this or the old boards.

All the scores for SETI-1 should be combined, whether they were done using the original client of the BOINC client.

This is getting TROLL like. Give it up.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

This would surely annoy people (like me) who read the BOINC home page, stating BOINC was the future and classic would be phased out, and switched early.

Regards Hans

P.S: Sorry for the long sentence. :o)

Ditto! I could have easily obtained 50k had I chose to be a diehard and stick with classic. Now those that did stay somehow think they should not only have classic credit, but get BOINC credit, too?

Terry

We ALL should get all of our SETI-1 credit combined into one score, since it was all the same science and same WU types, regardless of client or platform.

When the next phase starts, with new science, start everyone over at 0. Makes perfect sense.

---

This would surely annoy people (like me) who read the BOINC home page, stating BOINC was the future and classic would be phased out, and switched early.

Regards Hans

P.S: Sorry for the long sentence. :o)

Ditto! I could have easily obtained 50k had I chose to be a diehard and stick with classic. Now those that did stay somehow think they should not only have classic credit, but get BOINC credit, too?

Terry

We ALL should get all of our SETI-1 credit combined into one score, since it was all the same science and same WU types, regardless of client or platform.

When the next phase starts, with new science, start everyone over at 0. Makes perfect sense.

If you wish to continue whipping this dead horse, PLEASE start a new thread.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

1) There were several science changes in Classic that changed the amount of work required for each result. Some people changed as late as possible to get as many credits as possible even though it was hurting the science.
2) There are high angle and low angle results. These require different amounts of work.
3) There are noisy result.
4) Some people ran programs that rejected results that were estimated (based on angle range) to take longer--leaving the harder ones uncrunched sometimes.
5) Cheating at the top of the leader board was apparently rampant. I recall seeing reports of hosts that returned a result every 5 minutes for months on end.

The above litany was part of the discussion that generated the no conversion ruling. And, some people that had left S@H Classic because of the cheating came back because BOINC is more cheat proof and the Classic cheaters were not going to be credited in BOINC CS.

---

BOINC WIKI

I thoroughly enjoyed crunching numbers for Seti classic. That was the only reason I had more than one computer dedicated to doing that and nothing else. For whatever their reasons, the SAH team has seen fit to alienate many of the people who have been the most dedicated to the project.

I have expressed my feelings about what has happened. It is now time for me to move on. I do not know what direction that may be, but Seti will not be in the mix. To those of you continuing on in this project, I wish you only the very best. Good luck, and I hope you do find that elusive signal we've all been looking for.

Goodbye

---

This would surely annoy people (like me) who read the BOINC home page, stating BOINC was the future and classic would be phased out, and switched early.

Regards Hans

P.S: Sorry for the long sentence. :o)

Ditto! I could have easily obtained 50k had I chose to be a diehard and stick with classic. Now those that did stay somehow think they should not only have classic credit, but get BOINC credit, too?

Terry

We ALL should get all of our SETI-1 credit combined into one score, since it was all the same science and same WU types, regardless of client or platform.

When the next phase starts, with new science, start everyone over at 0. Makes perfect sense.

Angus, ask yourself one tiny question: Are you volunteering your spare cpu cycles for science or for a credit score?

kev

---

kev

X2 4400+,4200+ @2.75GHz, XP1800+ @1.65GHz, P4 @1.6GHz

Angus, ask yourself one tiny question: Are you volunteering your spare cpu cycles for science or for a credit score?

kev

That's an easy one - that i've answered in public forums many times.

The credit, and only the credit. If that offends those that are in it only for the science - too bad. But credit is what keeps the masses crunching. Take away scores and watch your participation drop like a rock.

---

1) There were several science changes in Classic that changed the amount of work required for each result. Some people changed as late as possible to get as many credits as possible even though it was hurting the science.
2) There are high angle and low angle results. These require different amounts of work.
3) There are noisy result.
4) Some people ran programs that rejected results that were estimated (based on angle range) to take longer--leaving the harder ones uncrunched sometimes.
5) Cheating at the top of the leader board was apparently rampant. I recall seeing reports of hosts that returned a result every 5 minutes for months on end.

The above litany was part of the discussion that generated the no conversion ruling. And, some people that had left S@H Classic because of the cheating came back because BOINC is more cheat proof and the Classic cheaters were not going to be credited in BOINC CS.

Yes, John - we've all heard those before. There was plenty of chance for UCB to remove ovbious cheats, and there *were* accounts that were zeroed. At some point, they gave up doing that - perhaps when Dr. A left for a while?

However, it still remains that SETI Classic and the first phase of SETI under BOINC is essentially the same project. The scores should be combined in whatever manner is still possible.

Now that we're all here together and ready to start a completely new version, let's start the stats over as well. Other projects have done such - F@H is one notable if I remember right.

---