Reddit thinks SETI@home is not useful

Message boards : Number crunching : Reddit thinks SETI@home is not useful
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Steve S

Send message
Joined: 19 Jan 13
Posts: 27
Credit: 6,274,024
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1705018 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 20:20:15 UTC
Last modified: 25 Jul 2015, 20:43:34 UTC

At least a few people in the post think it is useful and calculating 170k hosts producing 123000 petaflops per day.

Here's the post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SETI/comments/3ejfwb/is_setihome_useful/
ID: 1705018 · Report as offensive
Jeremy S

Send message
Joined: 9 Nov 08
Posts: 6
Credit: 49,734
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1705030 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 22:20:45 UTC - in response to Message 1705018.  

At least a few people in the post think it is useful and calculating 170k hosts producing 123000 petaflops per day.

Here's the post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SETI/comments/3ejfwb/is_setihome_useful/


Screw Reddit... What has it done for you or the community?
ID: 1705030 · Report as offensive
PhonAcq

Send message
Joined: 14 Apr 01
Posts: 1656
Credit: 30,658,217
RAC: 1
United States
Message 1705040 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 22:46:59 UTC - in response to Message 1705018.  
Last modified: 25 Jul 2015, 22:48:27 UTC

I used to care about this question, "is seti@home useful", a lot, but have lost interest in the question in recent years, in favor of other endeavors. But, in short, the question is partially answered in that the project pushed the concept of distributed computing into a very different and impressive area. That was useful. But that is old news.

Is S@H helping with the "Search"? Most participants vocal on this message board are clueless or at least don't understand the question, thinking instead that merely running their clients into the end of their respective bathtub curves or getting the application to run on their favor smart phone is sufficient (or even interesting). Their focus is on their scores, the number of clients they have running, so forth. Truly a hobby.

The problem with properly answering the usefulness question is that there doesn't seem to be much theory behind this project as far as the Search is concerned. Without a theory, we have no metrics. Without a metric, we have no measure of success, except the thus far elusive one of finding the first valid radio source indicating extra terrestrial intelligence.

For example, it seems to me that somebody "smart" could introduce a few assumptions and derive a statistical theory, where we could extract from our collective computing efforts how sure we are that there isn't evidence of ET in a particular direction, set of directions, or larger portion of the universe. 99% confidence level? 99.999% confidence level? etc. I suppose the concept of time has to be added to these CL's. And, we could debate the validity of the assumptions instead of the merits of the credit system and improve upon them as our understanding matures. Alas, the development of such a theory seems like a worthwhile, NSF fundable endeavor, but one that has not been taken up.

Clearly, there are many people more educated than me on these matter. So I am very receptive of learning of efforts in the area. Notwithstanding, it is time, long past time, to begin assessing this project in terms of things relevant to the Search, and not just computer science or a hobby.
ID: 1705040 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1705125 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 5:21:56 UTC - in response to Message 1705040.  
Last modified: 26 Jul 2015, 5:26:44 UTC

The problem with properly answering the usefulness question is that there doesn't seem to be much theory behind this project as far as the Search is concerned.

There is, but it is a bit more technical than the average user cares about. Perhaps reading some of the science papers might be useful for you.
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_sci_newsletters.php
Make sure you read the cites as well so you get an understanding of radio astronomy. [Some of the cited papers may be behind journal pay walls]

Without a theory, we have no metrics. Without a metric, we have no measure of success, except the thus far elusive one of finding the first valid radio source indicating extra terrestrial intelligence.

For example, it seems to me that somebody "smart" could introduce a few assumptions and derive a statistical theory, where we could extract from our collective computing efforts how sure we are that there isn't evidence of ET in a particular direction, set of directions, or larger portion of the universe. 99% confidence level? 99.999% confidence level? etc. I suppose the concept of time has to be added to these CL's. And, we could debate the validity of the assumptions instead of the merits of the credit system and improve upon them as our understanding matures. Alas, the development of such a theory seems like a worthwhile, NSF fundable endeavor, but one that has not been taken up.

If you had been reading the science papers, you would see that such equations are in existence. The item to note is that to detect ET when ET isn't intentionally beaming a signal at you is impossible with our current dish and receivers, unless ET happens to be very close by. To find such an ET on the other side of the galaxy we would need an antenna 1000 times bigger than the one we are using, and in a true radio quiet area such as the far side of the moon. We have the tech, but not the $$$$. This also assumes ET isn't intentionally suppressing his signal. But everything is a wild guess. We don't know if ET uses radio. We don't know if ET uses lasers. ET might communicate with neutrino beams, which we can't detect yet. All we can say for sure is if ET is sending a signal with a X mega watt transmitter and it Y light years away on frequency Z and we point the antenna in the right direction we can or can't detect the signal. It doesn't talk about if ET has to send the signal to begin with.

Clearly, there are many people more educated than me on these matter. So I am very receptive of learning of efforts in the area. Notwithstanding, it is time, long past time, to begin assessing this project in terms of things relevant to the Search, and not just computer science or a hobby.

You must also realize that Seti@home is just one prong of many in the search for Seti. https://seti.berkeley.edu/ Other searches such as OSETI, SERENDIP. Then there are other groups also looking in totally different ways. http://www.seti.org/
Even Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_for_extraterrestrial_intelligence has a good bit of information.

The real issue, which is not presently addressed, is suppose that project A has a detection in their frequency band from a particular region, but it doesn't repeat, project B has one in a different frequency band from the same region of space. There is no universal NTPCKR that gets the data from both projects to say, "Hey this region should get a hard look by everyone."

<ed>PS I agree, anyone who is focused on RAC is doing it for a hobby, total credits, perhaps not so.
ID: 1705125 · Report as offensive
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3380
Credit: 296,162,071
RAC: 40
United States
Message 1705157 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 7:18:32 UTC - in response to Message 1705040.  

Well... wow. What a can of worms this opens.

I think the original "theory" was responsible for the choice to search the frequencies we search for whatever theoretical reason we are looking there. (I lost track.)

Beyond that, I think the search is almost entirely a matter of "what is possible" when "piggybacking" other non-SETI use of the telescope and taking data from wherever the telescope is pointed.

But here's the thing and we all just have to deal with this:

SERENDIP is the project that is actively looking. We aren't part of SERENDIP.

What we are doing is taking data SERENDIP found nothing in and sifting the noise at an incredibly low level. We're searching deep, deep into the noise.

Is that useless? Of course not.

A narrow-band signal broadcast right at us on purpose from a long, long, long way away would be so faint as to be deep, deep in the noise. We're looking where it would probably be (the faintest thing we can detect) if it is there at all.

It's either going to be that sort of quiet, or our alien brethren have so much power and so much extra time on their hands that they are able to paste us with an incredibly strong signal and you would pick it up on your microwave oven.

The "waste of time" is probably SERENDIP as a free-standing project. It just isn't sensitive enough (read: the computers are not fast enough) to find the most likely signal in the data. If SERENDIP finds an alien, pray he's peaceful because he's danged close-by or has one heck of a transmitter and could fry us all.

But here's the rub, the reason that we are ***currently*** (I hope you see and understand the emphasis) wasting our time is because we do such a fine job of sifting so much data so finely that we have out-stripped the project's ability to analyze the data we have provided.

The "waste" is current, but in-the-long-run our "currently" wasted efforts will eventually be used. Think of it like filling a reservoir behind a hydro-electric dam. Eventually that water will be used to make electricity and eventually the data we are returning will be used to look for a signal.

Are we looking for a signal in the right place on the radio dial? I would argue that we are not, but I am not a radio astronomer so not only is my opinion questionable, but it has just the right amount of ignorance to be either foolish or dangerous.

It does "feel" like after so long a time, we shouldn't fear tuning up and down the dial a bit, but we still would not know if we found something because, as I understand it, nobody is looking at any of the data we are currently producing. They are storing it. They are happy to have it. They are thrilled so many of us want to give it to them. One day they may get around to looking at it.

So, to your point --- SETI@Home isn't pointing the telescope. The "where" decision is made for us. The "what" question is also pretty-well handled for us. We're looking for anything that isn't natural that also isn't RFI (interference). With all of this free computing power, we're looking wherever the telescope points, so we're analyzing data from where we might guess a transmission would come-from, but we are also looking where we wouldn't think anything would be. In short, we're analyzing everything that's available to us, so "narrowing" that would really just mean shutting the system off if it wasn't pointed where we wanted it to point. What if it comes from somewhere we don't expect?

And then there's the other question of "what do we think the odds are of...".

How would we have any idea, at all, what might be in the mind of an alien who might think entirely differently than we do? So, we could debate the merit of various things (they do, we just aren't invited) but we would be doing it in nearly limitless ignorance. We'd just be seeing who could shout the loudest.

Suppose I think that a really intelligent alien would say, "I want to contact Earth and there is so much noise in toward the middle of the galaxy that I want to put a transmitter in the intergalactic space off the tip of the Western Spiral Arm of the galaxy. That way, when they hear my beep-beep noises they won't have all that stellar garbage and hydrogen gas and stuff to contend-with."

Makes sense in a way.

Or maybe I think we should be listening at our own TV-leakage frequencies... Why do I think that a highly intelligent race of amoeba-like beings would be interested in watching TV, and if they were, why would it be on our VHF channel 3? They couldn't even press the buttons on their remote controls without getting all bent out of shape. (sounds like a Seth joke, doesn't it?) Looking for hyper-intelligent amoeba sit-coms is probably not a well-informed strategy.

Using microwave beams for interstellar communications? What? You want to send a message to the great-great-great-great-great-great grandchild of the party to whom you are speaking? What's this last "Earth-like planet" they found? It's like 1,500 light years away, isn't it? If they use RF energy to communicate across interstellar distances, I think the conversation is going to be quite... boring, don't you? So, we're having to look for something beamed toward us from there for some reason other than communication originating back when Gregorian Chant made-up the entire Top 40.

Looking for a tightly-focused microwave beam, shot from a telescope like Arecibo, directly at us, is probably no better than tuning your TV between channels and hoping they will write "Hello Earthlings!" in the static. Not that we even have TVs we can de-tune like that to even see the static... Most of those have been thrown away.

So, in a happier theory a non-amoeba-like alien is popping a gigantic bag of corn in space using the power of several fusion reactors to light-up the galaxy with a discernible transmission for ten minutes (amoeba-like aliens couldn't chew it). We just *happen* to be in the direct line of their shot at their popcorn that happens to pop at the specific frequencies we are checking and Arecibo just happens to be pointed that direction...

Let's say SERENDIP wasn't sensitive enough to "hear" that. Let us assume SETI@Home is.

Eventually that data gets to Berkeley and eventually we crunch it and eventually our crunch-results get put into the vast left-winged database.

Then let's say some Capitalist either gives, or gets taxed, enough money to purchase the men, machines, and equipment necessary to... oh, wait... in what fantasy world must I be living to believe that a Capitalist would ever give $100 million... I mean it's so unlikely that someone like a founder of Microsoft or some Russian industrialist or tech jockey with a... wait...uh.. mmmmm,yeah.

I digressed.

...to continue in a more believable way: The money is eventually given by lots of middle class people and tenured academicians to actually SEARCH the database that we've been building for over a decade and "lo and behold" there sits this wonderful signal! Quick! Re-observe that part of the sky! Quick! (quick is defined as, "sometime in the up-coming decade" as a lot of salaries have to be paid, first, then hardware has to be bought, and more salaries paid, etc )

So, after someone writes a grant proposal and gets some NSF funding and seven visiting professors are hired to come and visit and then go visit somewhere else, we point the telescope back at that spot in the sky.

Our popcorn eating friends from iota-eta-kernel have long since finished their snack, brushed their teeth, and have gone to bed. Since we have no idea where they were except by guessing based on the interstellar medium in that general direction's effect on signals passing through it, we don't really know if they are still there or where they might have got off to.

Maybe they stepped into the bathroom for a bicarb.

The scientific conclusion? "Anomaly. A statistically likely false positive. Nothing interesting here. Too bad."

Wasting our time and Earth's precious natural resources? Us? No way, man, no way.

One day archeologists will stumble across all those hard drives full of the billions of "hits" made by us, here at SETI@Home, and turn to the alien standing next to him and say, "Add this to the recycling bin, would you?"

In the meantime, we're doing hard-core science as defined by hard-core scientists who encourage you have a back-up project.

<99% of this may not necessarily reflect the views of the author>

<then again, it might>

In conclusion: I think that the theory is that where we are listening on the radio dial is the most likely place to tune if you want to have a hope of hearing anything at all, due to atmospheric absorption and the way radio is scattered as it crossed huge tracts of space.

We listen everywhere we can since we don't have enough money to have our own telescopes or buy much observation-time.

No, SETI@Home is not *currently* aiding in the search except that some of us give Berkeley money and equipment it uses for our benefit and for the benefit of SERENDIP and without SETI@Home there wouldn't have been that source of funding. We, SETI@Home folks, are searching, but nobody is looking at what we've found, if anything, which is apparently a monumental task that SETI@Home just does not have the resources to undertake.

Read the following link carefully, realizing it is ten years old.

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/guest-blogs/amir-alexander/setiathome_20050707.html

Imagine how much more complicated it has gotten in the last decade with the popularity of GPUs, ever-faster processors, better code, etc. It isn't even really fair to expect them to be able to keep-up.
ID: 1705157 · Report as offensive
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3380
Credit: 296,162,071
RAC: 40
United States
Message 1705159 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 7:27:15 UTC - in response to Message 1705125.  



The real issue, which is not presently addressed, is suppose that project A has a detection in their frequency band from a particular region, but it doesn't repeat, project B has one in a different frequency band from the same region of space. There is no universal NTPCKR that gets the data from both projects to say, "Hey this region should get a hard look by everyone."



Amen to the idea of getting that done.

Did you see IBM's Watson beat up on Jeopardy champions? Apparently a LOT of data can get searched pretty quickly if you've got the machinery and the right programmers... all of which costs a lot of money.

Hopefully, this will get consolidated, put in a "cloud," and get done. The longer we wait for even our own NTPCkr the harder it gets to implement
ID: 1705159 · Report as offensive
Profile Steve S

Send message
Joined: 19 Jan 13
Posts: 27
Credit: 6,274,024
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1705179 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 8:37:58 UTC - in response to Message 1705159.  
Last modified: 26 Jul 2015, 8:39:03 UTC

Hopefully, this will get consolidated, put in a "cloud," and get done. The longer we wait for even our own NTPCkr the harder it gets to implement


SETI@home won't go into the cloud because the amount of processing required to equal the current distributed network would cost $600k or more a month at amazon:

http://boincstats.com/en/stats/0/project/detail
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/18-hours-33k-and-156314-cores-amazon-cloud-hpc-hits-a-petaflop/

So that's a lot of money, and SETI projects would have to split their money between telescope time and server time, but there's no need for that because of SETI@home distributed computing.

Although SETI@home could double it's computing power if someone gave it $144 million dollars directly, that's 1.2 mill a month for 10 years. But where's that money going to come from?
ID: 1705179 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1705277 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 15:54:04 UTC - in response to Message 1705159.  



The real issue, which is not presently addressed, is suppose that project A has a detection in their frequency band from a particular region, but it doesn't repeat, project B has one in a different frequency band from the same region of space. There is no universal NTPCKR that gets the data from both projects to say, "Hey this region should get a hard look by everyone."



Amen to the idea of getting that done.

Did you see IBM's Watson beat up on Jeopardy champions? Apparently a LOT of data can get searched pretty quickly if you've got the machinery and the right programmers... all of which costs a lot of money.

Hopefully, this will get consolidated, put in a "cloud," and get done. The longer we wait for even our own NTPCkr the harder it gets to implement

You mean the not near time PCKR that does get run once in a while when we are in the middle of an outrage so the database is stable and it can pick through it and spit out a table of candidates? Unfortunately the waterfall plots of those persistent candidates all look a lot like RFI, or they have so far.

What most of you fail to realize from Seti having to piggy back, is the sexy astronomical targets get looked at a lot. The random spots of sky away from astronomical targets might get swept once a decade. We aren't doing a pattern search of the sky.

Also you fail to realize this search is looking for an ET that wants to be found. The assumption is ET is transmitting a beacon and is doing so for several years running. We aren't there yet and I doubt with our fear of the unknown we ever will transmit such a beacon, even if we could find the necessary power to do so.
ID: 1705277 · Report as offensive
kittyman Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 51468
Credit: 1,018,363,574
RAC: 1,004
United States
Message 1705304 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 16:38:11 UTC

Is Seti@Home 'useful'?
Not in the real sense of the word, I suppose.
Useful in the sense that it returns something for the time and energy and cost involved?
No..........not YET.

On the other hand though, there is the tangible thought that we, through our efforts and expenditures ARE accomplishing something that WHEN.......I repeat, WHEN we find what we are looking for it shall be bookmarked as one of the greatest accomplishments of humankind.

I would not state that if I did not believe it to be true. And after more than 15 years at it, I obviously still believe it to be true, or I would not be here.

Keep the faith, kids.

We are NOT alone in this universe of ours.
We are not.
"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

ID: 1705304 · Report as offensive
Profile HAL9000
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6534
Credit: 196,805,888
RAC: 57
United States
Message 1705319 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 17:35:30 UTC

When sometimes says "SETI hasn't found anything & isn't useful" I would ask.
If an x-ray is taken looking for broken bones & no broken bones are found. Does that mean that taking x-rays are not useful? It only indicates what was being looked for in that area at that time was not present. In science a negative result is still a result.
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[
ID: 1705319 · Report as offensive
kittyman Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 51468
Credit: 1,018,363,574
RAC: 1,004
United States
Message 1705323 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 17:47:41 UTC - in response to Message 1705319.  

When sometimes says "SETI hasn't found anything & isn't useful" I would ask.
If an x-ray is taken looking for broken bones & no broken bones are found. Does that mean that taking x-rays are not useful? It only indicates what was being looked for in that area at that time was not present. In science a negative result is still a result.

We currently have many negative results.
That does not mean to say we have not found anything./
It only means that to date, we have disproved some theories about random noise.

The search goes on.
"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

ID: 1705323 · Report as offensive
Profile jason_gee
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Nov 06
Posts: 7489
Credit: 91,093,184
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 1705338 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 19:09:40 UTC
Last modified: 26 Jul 2015, 19:11:10 UTC

Don't know much about Reddit, but saw on recent video by tek syndicate that while ~95% people are great on there, there are massive issues with the remainder and trolling happening, with Reddit trying to take a bit of control there.

FWIW, I believe we wouldn't have PCs, Velcro, Tang, or the space pen, without having done similar exploration looking to collect a bunch of rocks froim the moon...Also knowing it's not made out of cheese will probably turn out to be a useful fact. Point is, it's pretty difficult to believe anyone can predict what use a given piece of research may come to down the line, with or without a direct result. Maybe they need to consider that a search on this kindof scale involves a bit more spinoff value than knowing our place in the universe (which may or may not matter by itself to a single person).

To put it in context, if hadn't been here over the years, I doubt I would have been introduced to GPU programming, or had the interest. Can these people tell me all the possible applications this may have once I feel I've mastered it ?
"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.
ID: 1705338 · Report as offensive
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3380
Credit: 296,162,071
RAC: 40
United States
Message 1705432 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 0:41:13 UTC - in response to Message 1705277.  


You mean the not near time PCKR that does get run once in a while when we are in the middle of an outrage so the database is stable and it can pick through it and spit out a table of candidates?


Yeah, that one.

Where are you finding any news from it that's remotely recent?

For whoever it was that misunderstood the whole thing: I wasn't talking about moving the SETI@Home project to a cloud. I was only talking about this gigantic and problematic data set *after* SETI@Home has done its work. I believe that may have been mentioned as a thing by Dan at some point.

Of course, I don't know how big and problematic the data is, but Matt was recently caught on video saying he needed terabytes of SSDs and half a terabyte of RAM in a server to take it to "the next level."


Here are the two things Matt said that I paid attention-to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uz1YUuE810&list=PLd87sFtDYl5O6hX7qqSmszNx07wGtTw0g&index=4

https://youtu.be/nJirUUTIiiE?t=3m19s

Follow all the way through to the "fell by the wayside" and "we don't have the resources," statements. It seems like the outages they use to "turn the crank" only happen every few years.

I can understand why he might have chosen not-to, but he might have named the group that self-organized the non-profit to raise the money. I know, that would have been shameless promotion. On the other hand, I wonder who might have clicked-through with a MasterCard in their hand.

I realize, too, Gary, that you were probably not addressing me personally when you said that we are looking for an E.T. that wants to be found. I completely understand that, but I also expect that since we don't really know what an E.T. might be up-to, it might be possible to find one accidentally who unknowingly or at least with a different intention did something we can hear.

I'm sure you weren't addressing me specifically when you said most don't realize the "sexy" places are getting observed. I would hope that most would assume that Arecibo is being used to look at something instead of looking at nothing. If it is sexily looking more than a few hundred light years away, there is no chance that it will pick-up a signal we can "hear" on our radios. That includes a whopper of a transmitter pointed right at us.

Maybe they modulate pulsars? We could and do hear that.

Again, why would anyone do that? What is the point of having communication with a 400 year lag? A yes or no answer to a yes or no question would take 800 years to get asked and answered. Even if the being is immortal, that's a slow conversation. I can't rule it out, though. What if E.T.'s perception of the passing of time is completely different than mine?

To your point and agreeing with you entirely; that's why I hold out far more hope for AstroPulse than I do MB. The signal should we discernible from further away and a broadband "BEEP! BEEP!" would more likely attract attention.
ID: 1705432 · Report as offensive
Profile MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 6895
Credit: 6,588,977
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1705437 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 1:50:19 UTC

I Continue to Crunch for this Reason: I'm An Idiot. I Like Wasting Time and Resources.

I Like Recieving No Real Answers.

I Want to Die Knowing I can add S at H to my Huge List of 'Jokes' on Me.

I've always Like punching myself in the face and banging my head into walls.

Pain and Hope Unrealized 'is' The Bain of My Existence.

I Have A Vise with My Name on 'It'. Put Head In or 'Other' and Tighten.

Scream.

Loudly.

No One 'is' Listening.

Flat Line Awaiting ________________________________________________________________________________

.

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!
ID: 1705437 · Report as offensive
kittyman Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 51468
Credit: 1,018,363,574
RAC: 1,004
United States
Message 1705439 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 2:32:36 UTC - in response to Message 1705437.  
Last modified: 27 Jul 2015, 2:33:30 UTC


Flat Line Awaiting ________________________________________________________________________________

.

Dull, your ignorance is only more amazing than your lack of intellect.
Please, if you can, save us from your nonsense by leaving the project and thus sparing us from your limited wit.
"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

ID: 1705439 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1705449 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 4:29:21 UTC - in response to Message 1705432.  

As to those Sexy astronomical targets, realize most of them are places where there is lots of nasty ionizing radiation and either stars at the very beginning or very end of their life. Not really places where we would expect life as we know it to be hanging around. Dull boring and ordinary is more likely place to find life, at least long term civilizations.

As to the SSD and RAM requirement, that has to do with the number of bins that our candidates go into. We talk about 5 megapixel or 12 megapixel cameras. They have bins more like a terrapixel camera. Keeping that all sky image in RAM for near time access isn't going to be done on your ordinary home PC!

But, it is quite doable if you don't need real time access. Remember the bad old days of computing when the database was on punch cards or magnetic tape?
ID: 1705449 · Report as offensive
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3380
Credit: 296,162,071
RAC: 40
United States
Message 1705466 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 5:28:02 UTC - in response to Message 1705449.  



But, it is quite doable if you don't need real time access. Remember the bad old days of computing when the database was on punch cards or magnetic tape?


You had punch cards?

Luxury!

We used to have to make holes in bits of used Lucky Charms boxes by sticking it in our mouths while the boss hit us on the head with a Whack-A-Mole mallet.

If you've never seen this, you might find it entertaining:

Four Yorkshiremen

I assumed that even with SSDs and the best data access money can buy that it would take a while.

I've put OS/2 2.1, Word Perfect, Quattro, and Paradox on a machine (in a row) using boxes full of 3.5" floppy disks. I can be patient.

To the original poster's point, wouldn't it be great if we ("we" in this case meaning "they who get to decide") had 20% of the time on Arecibo and could point it wherever we / they wanted?

Better yet, get it built and give us 1% of the time on the SKA.

Or better still... Let's see if we can get Branson to take us to the other side of the moon.

By the way, did you catch Matt saying "the dark side of the moon?" Pink Floyd influenced a generation. There is no "dark side" of the moon. I know Matt knows that, I'm sure you know that, and I sometimes say it myself. My now college-aged children thought there was a dark side of the moon until too recently when I had to disabuse them of the idea. (can a parent go to jail for child disabuse?) We should watch our words. I thought the things that run around on the ground with six legs were spelled "b e a t l e s" until I was about ten.
ID: 1705466 · Report as offensive
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3380
Credit: 296,162,071
RAC: 40
United States
Message 1705467 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 5:30:36 UTC - in response to Message 1705437.  



I Continue to Crunch for this Reason: I'm An Idiot. I Like Wasting Time and Resources.



Well, have a joyful and happy heart knowing that with a RAC like yours, you aren't wasting very much.
ID: 1705467 · Report as offensive
Profile HAL9000
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6534
Credit: 196,805,888
RAC: 57
United States
Message 1705566 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 12:29:48 UTC - in response to Message 1705533.  

Quite a few of us would like to see him disappear for good and never come back, but even his little contribution does help and has to be seen as welcome. If he annoys you that much, which of course he deliberately does to get attention, the answer is to put him on ignore. As an international project we cannot stop the mentally challenged from signing up and posting, provided they don't break the rules.

I found out that BOINC has a limit of only 26 users on the ignore list. Trying to add more results in an error.
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[
ID: 1705566 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24876
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1705577 - Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 13:06:35 UTC
Last modified: 27 Jul 2015, 13:27:25 UTC

There's much worse than Dull around these forums. A genuinely intelligent person will know that it takes all sorts to make a world & make allowances for that.

By making comments such as we have all seen these past few years just makes the commenter much worse than those being commented on.
ID: 1705577 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Reddit thinks SETI@home is not useful


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.