Well Jim you make a good argument for the new system.

I figured the old SETI cheat would come up, even though there is a fix in place for sweet picking already.

I had pulled all but one machine in my farm from SETI. This one machine was left to analyse the new credit layout so far. As of today I have placed 9 units more back online with SETI. This is not the full 30 that I had at one time on SETI, but part of that loss is due to failures, and Einstein. So SETI will most likely end up at around 12 machines total, Einstein 10 Machines total, and 8 varied units on other projects.

I so far from the analyses machine have seen a return to about 80% of the old RAC on the machine. I did read that it was best to be on the newer client so have installed the newer Boinc on all the SETI machines. Only some time will tell how things will go.

Instead of turning my back on SETI like some have done over this. I feel the science is worthwhile, and the new credit system needs some time to see how it is going to react. So for now, it is testing time on the new layout.

Oh and Jim, I am one of those so called whiners that have watched my RAC tumble from 4K+ to what it is now. Part of which is my own doing with pulling machines (from about 1.5k to now) What most fail to see, is the expense laid out by the farmers. We tend to be credit frenzied,lol. All we ask for is every bit of credit we can get. Does not mean we are not in it for the science as well. Just means we are competitive is all. Is the new credit system going to stop me from buying new machines, No. Will it effect what projects that machine will crunch, Maybe. So you see, the faster the credit problem is solved and stabilized the better for the project. I know some of the farms have either pulled out all together or scaled way back on SETI until things get hashed out. Hopefully this does not become a big loss for SETI like the switch from classic to home.

I would love to be the first to identify the signal. But to be realistic, there are many other projects running right now that have a more direct impact on humanity right now.

So if it comes to a pure science crunch, my farm will swing even more towards Rosetta, and SIMAP. This being a personal preferance due to the science being done at those projects. Having lost family to some of the goals these 2 projects are trying to help find a cure or prevention of.

---

Beach Bums Current Stats:


Come Join us at Hawaiian Beach Bums

Based on boincstat charts (http://www.boincstats.com/stats/project_graph.php?pr=sah), S@H was validating an average of 25 millions credit per day, until early May. Now it is running an average of 18 millions credit/day. The chart is prety consistent, and shows a 30% drop.

There are several factors to explain this, but all linked to the new credit system. Some users are getting less credit/hour, and some simply switched to other projects or shut down farms, but the numbers are a clear evidence of the combined results.

I understand the requirement for parity with other Boinc projects, but I hope the S@H has a plan to address this question. The other alternative is to accept the 30% drop in project chunching capability.

---

Seems that the donations to Berkeley are following a similar trend on the donation history page!

Just an observation.

Graeme.
www.boincuk.com

---

Lemme take another swing at the cries of "The New Credit system Is Unfair!"

Consider the following analogy:

There is a public bath house near some hot springs. There are many tubs, but they need to be filled with hot water from the springs. They need to be filled all the time, they never run out, because people are always taking baths and the water is only good for one bath.

Pipes have not been invented, so all the water must be carried up from the hot springs to the bath tubs in buckets. Buckets are carried by animals.

A sheep can carry about 2 buckets at a time, but is quite slow at making it's way up the hill. An ox can carry 20 buckets at a time, and is also quite slow. A donkey can carry 10 buckets at a time, but is quite fast. An Ostrich can carry only 1, but is extremely fast. Not all animals of the same type are the same. There are big sheep and little sheep. Fast donkeys and slow donkeys. All these different animals have different prices too. Some animals (like alligators) that people might own for whatever reason, are poor at this water carrying thing relative to their cost. There are so many different kinds of animals that have different abilities and which might be carrying other things for their owners at the same time, that there's no way to fairly measure them at a glance.

Many people own animals they use to carry water. Some use their animals all the time, some only when they're going that way anyway. But the key is, that all these people get paid for their efforts.

The bath house owner wants to pay people fairly, so he supplies everyone with identical, free buckets. As bath tubs aren't all the same size, (nor does the owner want them to be) to be fair, he cannot pay people based on how many bath tubs they fill. He did this years ago, and people rushed to fill only the small tubs. This created a logistics nightmare, and unfairly paid those that rushed to fill the small tubs, since it took less work.

So, the owner decides that people get paid based on how many buckets they dump.

It takes about 32 buckets to fill a tub, on average, and he pays about $1 per bucket. So workers can expect to receive about $32 per tub they fill.

...

All make sense so far?

...

Then a group of workers decide to become wise entrepreneurs. They start to look at how they might carry more buckets, or buckets faster. Some decide to just go out and buy more animals. Some decide that instead of having their lazy animals sit around their farm all day doing nothing, that he's going to put them to work carrying buckets, even if he has to feed them more in a day.

But the smartest entrepreneurs of all start to look at the buckets. They notice that even though all the water in the bucket makes it to the bath house, right when they're pouring it, some of the water spills.

Incredibly, the biggest spills come from the largest animals. When the Ox and the Donkey go dump their buckets, the buckets leak and spill almost 2/3 of it!!! What a waste!!!

So the entrepreneurs sit down and say "We can design a better bucket." And they do, because these are very smart people. They look into the bath house industry and all it entails, and fix the problem. They end up designing special buckets for each animal. Those new buckets combined with a better pouring system for each bucket, ensure that almost no water is spilled!

The entrepreneurs perfect this system, and then, because they are great people, they give it away to anyone who wants to use it. Only about 1% of the workers ever hear about it though.

So now these entrepreneurs and their followers, even though their animals are doing the same amount of work as before (and as others), can produce results in up to 1/3 of the time! AWESOME!

Except that they don't get paid based on how many tubs they fill (because tubs are all different). They get paid based on how many buckets of water they bring up the hill. And they're bringing the same amount of buckets as they were before! It's only that they're not wasting 2/3 of the water when they go to pour it.

Workers are paid to bring full buckets. For all they care, they could be dumping them on the ground at the top of the hill. They're paid to bring them, that's it. But there's a gap in the logic. What the bath house owner pays for, isn't exactly what he wants. He wants water in the tubs. He can't measure that, the best he can do is pay a flat rate for bringing a bucket to the top of the hill.

That's stupid! Everyone knows that's stupid. The entrepreneurs know it, their followers know it, the bath house owners know it, even the animals probably know it. But that's the system that's set up, and it works fairly from a worker's standpoint for the 99% of people using the standard buckets.

So the followers ask the entrepreneurs to do something about this. Is this all set in stone?

As it turns out, no, it's not. The bath house owners are also great people, and they don't mind anyone using the new system (why would they?), and they of course notice how stupid the payment system is. True, they're paying *everyone* for a full bucket but only getting 1/3, and the followers certainly aren't bringing any more buckets, but, until the time that everyone else stops wasting, from the bath house owner's perspective, equivalent pay for equivalent results (not work!) means he should pay the followers for 3 buckets when they only bring up 1 bucket.

The owner knows the entrepreneurs and their followers are good and trustworthy people, and so they allow them to set up their own system.

In no time flat the entrepreneurs have a new system in place. Instead of using the bath house's supervisor (that counts buckets and records how much to pay each worker)... they're going to use their own supervisor. The new supervisor is aware of the situation, and anyone of the entrepreneurs or their followers who're smart enough, know to go talk to him instead. This new supervisor is smarter, he doesn't just count how many buckets are poured, he observes how much water actually makes it into the tubs compared to the workers using the normal buckets. So if an animal pours a full bucket into the tub instead of just 1/3 of a bucket like everyone else, the worker who owns him will get paid 3 times as much.

Because in the end, what really matters to the bath house owner is how much water is delivered. Both sides want that.

About this time, the bath house owner is shaking his head at how much water is being spilled, and what a waste that is. Because 99% of the people are still dumping 2/3 of their water when they go to pour it. They're expending the effort to carry a full bucket, so he's paying them for a full bucket, but he's only getting 1/3 of a bucket. The owner calls in the entrepreneurs, and sits down with them to figure out a new specialized bucket and pouring system to replace the standard bucket that's spilling water everywhere. The owner posts signs and tells everyone "There is a new bucket coming soon!"

While this is going on, the entrepreneurs' followers are having a ball. They're making $3 per bucket they dump, rather than $1. They didn't get any more out of their animals, their animals are no stronger or faster than the animals carrying standard buckets.. they're just accomplishing 3 times as much and getting paid for such.

Well, animals cost money too. As does feeding them extra to work all day long instead of just sitting around. But the entrepreneurs' followers like how much they're doing compared to everyone else, and they start to invest. They invest in the biggest and fastest animals that are most especially suited to bucket carrying. Generally speaking, these are the most expensive animals out there, the newest stock from the best breeders.

This goes on for some time.

...

Then one day, the bath house owner says to everyone "We're done! We have the new buckets completed. We'll start to phase everyone out over the next week. Finish carrying the buckets you have."

These new buckets are hot stuff. They're, in many ways, just like the buckets that the entrepreneurs designed months ago. They barely spill at all.

But... trouble!!

All the entrepreneurs' followers are upset. "What do you mean we only get $1 per bucket now!?!", "This new system is unfair!", "Why are you treating us this way! We're the ones that worked hardest for you!", "Pay me what you used to, or I'm going to work for someone else!"

But hold on... what's happened?

What's happened is that the 99% who were using the standard bucket, getting paid for a full bucket, and spilling up to 2/3 of it, aren't spilling it any more.

The "extra" that the entrepreneurs' followers were receiving wasn't ever for extra *work* they put in, (which was zero), it was for the extra *results* they were producing, (which was up to 3 times).

... And they're not producing extra results anymore.

Across the board everyone is about 3 times as efficient. The bath house owner is now filling bath tubs 3 times as fast. This means for the same cost, he can get 3 times as many tubs. But what he decides to do instead, is start using hot tubs instead of bath tubs (hot tubs are much bigger).

From a work perspective, nothing has changed. Everyone still gets $1 per bucket they take from the hot springs to the bath house.

From a broad results perspective, there is a phenomenal change. The bath house is 3 times as successful as it used to be!

From the perspective of the entrepreneurs followers, their loophole, which was exploited honestly and which allowed them to be awarded extra for extra results, is now closed. Or opened, whichever way you see it. Everyone is now using their loophole. There is no "extra" results, so there is no "extra" rewards. If the entrepreneurs can design a new method by which they can get "extra" results from the norm again, by all means, I think the bath house owners would not mind a bit rewarding them extra by using those methods.

However, they're still upset. They went and bought all these animals based on the extra reward being absolute, and now that gap is closed.

Who's fault is that? Did the bath house owner at some point say to them or make them believe "This will never change, go ahead and invest in this current system, because it will stay that way for a long time"? No. Did these people ever stop to ask for assurances or timelines before they made their purchases? No, or if they did, they would have received a non-committal reply. Point being, the bath house owner let everyone know that a new bucket system, similar to the superior system developed by the entrepreneurs, was on the way.

If anyone went and invested or made predictions based on that temporary flawed system that they (at least recently) knew was changing, and, if not, at least didn't know that *wasn't* changing, they made poor decisions. I would sympathize, but, if it was that serious a deal to them, why didn't they see if they could get assurances beforehand?

Okay, so that's done. Is there anything that anyone can do to fix it?

Sure:

1) The bath house owner could go back to the old system. The flawed system where everyone is dumping 2/3 of their buckets on the ground and not into the tubs. This horrible waste would then allow the entrepreneurs' followers to reap extra pay for not spilling.

... but since the followers make up only 1% of the productivity of the bath house, the bath house owner would be sacrificing about 65% of his productivity to keep that 1% happy.

Is that a good deal? Are the 1% really worth appeasing by making such a sacrifice? Are the 1% claiming that such a sacrifice should be made?

2) The bath house owner could just pay everyone 3 times as much, since they're accomplishing 3 times as much.

The analogy breaks down a bit here, but suffice to say, there's no actual "profit" or "pay" involved. So the "unfairness" isn't towards the 1%, it's really more towards the 99% who were spilling 2/3 of their buckets and still getting paid for a full bucket. The standard was "1 full bucket, for $1". It's no one's fault, the buckets were what they were.. but that was the standard.

You could explain it to say that there was an agreed-upon rate for all animals used in any business, and you can't just triple it for your business. You have to keep work done the same. (analogy breaks down again, but, deal with it).

3) The bath house owner could remember who the entrepreneurs and their followers were, and treat them differently than everyone else.

The problem being.. for how long? They were never told to base any decisions on the current system. And for what? They're not getting any more or better results than anyone else anymore. They don't deserve more. Before when they did more, for as long as that lasted, they did reap the benefits. Now those days are gone.

The analogy breaks down again anyway, because money isn't transferable. They didn't buy animals with the same money they expected to receive from the work, there were... two different kinds of money, if that makes sense. The money they got from carrying buckets could never in any way pay for the animals or their feed. It was only a prestige kind of money. "Profitability" expectations don't apply, only "Rank" expectations.

....

So what can the upset workers do?

They can sit back and be happy that the bath house is 3 times as successful as it used to be thanks to their efforts.

They can spend time trying to find new ways of achieving better and faster results with the same work put in (for as long as that lasts).

They can jump over to another employer out of spite. Even though it gets them nothing extra.

They can look for other employers part of the same system who have horribly inefficient systems like the bath house owner used to have, join up, entrepreneur better systems there, get new supervisors to get more rewards for more results, and hold on for as long as that ride lasts.

Or they can whine and complain about it and pout around about how it's not fair that their unchecked assumptions didn't last forever.

----

Analogy over.

Here's the comparison list so if you're about to complain, you don't get things wrong:

1) Bath House = SETI@home
2) Bath House Owner = People who run S@H
3) Animals (different kinds) = Computers (different kinds)
4) Buckets = Science app algorithms
5) Supervisors = BOINC clients
6) Workers = Users
7) Animal farms = Server farms
8) Animal feed = Electricity
9) Bath Tubs = Work Units
10) Hot Tubs = Enhanced Work Units
11) Cost for animals & food = Real money costs for computers/electricity
12) Pay for buckets = S@H credits
13) Other employers = E@H, SIMAP, Rosetta, etc
14) Spilling water = Any non-optimized piece of code that could be better
15) Entrepreneurs = Trux/Crunch3r/people who helped them
16) Entrepreneurs' Followers = People running optimized science/BOINC apps

Now, I ran optimized apps and BOINC client. But I always saw it as a temporary thing. Milk it while I can. I never received or heard about any assurances that things would stay that way forever. So now that everyone is making extra, I don't feel "Deprived". I *was* producing more than everyone else, for a bit, and received extra for it. Now I'm *not* producing more, so I'm back to normal.

I don't think I'm entitled to anything extra just because I was one of the people who ran an optimized app for a while before Enhanced came along and everyone had an optimized app.

If team USA saw they were going to pass team Germany in 2 years, based on an assumption... and that assumption was a poor assumption to make.. too bad. Who's fault is that? If you purchased units only because of the extra credit you got, without checking how long that extra credit opportunity was available.. too bad. Again, who's fault is that?

I sympathize, it sucks to think "All right, we're on track just 2 more years" .. and then all of a sudden "Aww crap. Well, back to 6 years." I get it. But what do you want to be done about it? Go ahead, suggest something. None of the scenarios I came up with are anything but ridiculous and horribly selfish.

SETI@Home is getting 3 times the results from using the same amount of computing time. For whom here does that not completely and utter overshadow your own personal credit score adjustments?

I've let most of my machines go over to Einstein, (automatically, as I haven't updated my client and was attached to both S@H & E@H), where there's still quite a bit of optimizing to benefit from.

I feel a little dirty for doing that, because it means that whatever project has the least default optimized science app, may attract the largest of the credit chasers and power crunchers. Encouraging project leaders to make intentionally non-optimized apps.

But then, I feel a little cleaner, knowing that any science project would be stupid to intentionally do so or to not update their science app sooner or later, as power crunchers are nowhere near a visible percentage of the crunching done.

Does anyone actually have any legitimate "Wait, credit isn't be given fairly" claims aside from them wanting their extra rewards for what is now simply standard results?

---

Brilliant! This deserves a Hall of Fame...

Andy.

Lemme take another swing at the cries of "The New Credit system Is Unfair!"

Consider the following analogy:

There is a public bath house near some hot springs. There are many tubs, but they need to be filled with hot water from the springs. They need to be filled all the time, they never run out, because people are always taking baths and the water is only good for one bath.

<incredibly sensible analogy trimmed for space only>

I really wish I could [+] this post.

---

Unfortunately some owners secretly tuned up their engines which gave them an unfair advantage...

It sounds like cheating for me. Since opt apps are not cheating, nor secret, dind't get your point here...

... and everyone was happy.

If everyone is so happy, why this thread of hundreds of posts of volunteers complaining?

---

Consider the following analogy:

There is a public bath house near some hot springs. There are many tubs, but they need to be filled with hot water from the springs. They need to be filled all the time, they never run out, because people are always taking baths and the water is only good for one bath.


Would get a [+] from me too. That needs to be saved.

---

Lemme take another swing at the cries of "The New Credit system Is Unfair!"

Consider the following analogy:

There is a public bath house near some hot springs. There are many tubs, but they need to be filled with hot water from the springs. They need to be filled all the time, they never run out, because people are always taking baths and the water is only good for one bath.

<incredibly sensible analogy trimmed for space only>

I really wish I could [+] this post.

ditto

---

I don't know who "Administrator" is but he is a damn fine writer, and explained this better than any other post I've read (He should be writing books like: "Who Moved My Cheese"). The worst post I saw was the guy who said "Aynn Rand would want us to go on strike." I haven't discovered where that logic came from because as far as I knew she was blasting Socialism where you take from the producers to give to the non-producers. Haven't seen any of that around here.

Great Post

Tom Johns
The Maine Team
Lobsters and Pine Trees and Very Cold Winters!



[quote]Lemme take another swing at the cries of "The New Credit system Is Unfair!"

Consider the following analogy:

There is a public bath house near some hot springs. There are many tubs, but they need to be filled with hot water from the springs. They need to be filled all the time, they never run out, because people are always taking baths and the water is only good for one bath.

---

Lemme take another swing at the cries of "The New Credit system Is Unfair!"

Consider the following analogy:

snip

Very interesting to say the least, but I have a very simple question. I'm a late comer to BOINC, but that's because I stayed with Classic till the end.

My question is this, since I have never used any enhanced programs or "souped up" programs to keep from spilling (I just used what you gave me.) and now I find that on my fastest machine, which isn't all that fast these days, I have fallen from about 190 units per day to around 130 and still seem to be heading downhill.

Why is this? Nothing that I can see has changed on my end, except for the huge time sets of the new WU's. Mine are around 15 hours now! I'd gladly go back to the smaller ones!

Allen

---

Lemme take another swing at the cries of "The New Credit system Is Unfair!"

Absolutely brilliant analogy. I agree 100%, except I'm crunching Enhanced Seti(optimized thanks to crunch3r and trux) on most of my machines and do both Rosetta and Einstein (optimized with trux ;-)). I crunch the projects I like. Credits are nice, but secondary. :-)

---

XaaK

Absolutely brilliant analogy.

I agree. Long... but brilliant. It's brilliant in the sense that it makes what's happened so clear. Sure, the analogy is limited (as all analogies are), yet it goes a very long way toward illuminating what has actually happened with the transition to SETI Enhanced, versus all the chest beating (on all sides of the issue) that has gone on here.

Hey, I'm relatively new so my opinion probably counts for little. Ne'ertheless, here it is. Please try not to beat me up for voicing it.

I intend to stay with SETI for as long as it continues, and I'll jump in and work on AstroPulse when it's available as well. This project just captures my imagination. It excites me, and even if no signal is ever found I still know that what's being done is worthwhile. I couldn't care less about the credits. I just like the crunching.

---

What a load of bull take the donkey and go home. Berkely is not paying on a one for one basis.

Keep the childish comparisons and just get it all to work and not make us all Beta Testers. Five or ten hour errors are not fair payment for work when it's either the work unit or the client Berkeley supplied that's at fault.
C++ errors or repeating WUs for 3 or 4 times and ones that hang and run on forever to finally get a few points are not just!!
Pre optimized Seti 4.xx had a better return than this and Berkeley claims to only have a 10% drop Try about 60%+

I will gladly do the work and put the time and equipment in but come on now fix the damed thing PLEASE!

---

Come and Visit Us at
BBR TeamStarFire


****My 9th year of Seti****A Founding Member of the Original Seti Team Starfire at Broadband Reports.com ****

What a load of bull take the donkey and go home. Keep the childish comparisons and just get it all to work and not make us all Beta Testers.

(Snip random offtopic whining about a few bugs)

Heh, that's right, you're pouting and making offtopic complaints, and I'm childish for explaining something.

Perhaps you're mistaken, I don't work for SETI. My choice isn't: A) Fix every bug with Enhanced, or B) Make a childish comparison.

Does this have anything to do with "Concerns regarding the new credit system"? No. You seem to be upset that a new system when implemented on a million new computers might *gasp* have some bugs show up. Go post in the "Computation errors" thread if you have anything constructive to mention. Your complaints have nothing to do with credit being assigned.. and seem to be regarding an entirely temporary situation.

Wait a couple weeks.

Christ you're whiney.

---

What a load of bull take the donkey and go home. Keep the childish comparisons and just get it all to work and not make us all Beta Testers.

(Snip random offtopic whining about a few bugs)

Heh, that's right, you're pouting and making offtopic complaints, and I'm childish for explaining something.

Perhaps you're mistaken, I don't work for SETI. My choice isn't: A) Fix every bug with Enhanced, or B) Make a childish comparison.

Does this have anything to do with "Concerns regarding the new credit system"? No. You seem to be upset that a new system when implemented on a million new computers might *gasp* have some bugs show up. Go post in the "Computation errors" thread if you have anything constructive to mention. Your complaints have nothing to do with credit being assigned.. and seem to be regarding an entirely temporary situation.

Wait a couple weeks.

Christ you're whiney.

Problem is you did not explain it.

Crunch3r and others developed a way to allow the same animal to carry more buckets, not more water per bucket, then it was noticed that those carrying more buckets were not getting paid the same per bucket but were getting shorted. So Trux and others developed a way to get the same pay per bucket when using Crunch3r's method for carrying the buckets. This way it was fair, those that could carry more, got paid for more. (no water was spilled or the WU would not have been validated)

Problem is that the owners of the bath house not only changed the rules and gave us better buckets to carry, they gave us bigger ones and expect us to get the same pay for more work. If I bought an animal on predictions of payment of 2400 dollars a day for a 24 hour based upon current production, then I would want to get paid that 2400 a day for that animal. If not, then this is a socity that will allow me to move my work force to another bath house and get paid what my animals are worth. Plain and simple -

A daily credit of 500 cut in half is 250, or a reduction of only 250 credits, however, some of us has seen 10,000, 15,000 or more in cut in pay for the same amount of work. Retarded!
From what I can see, the ones that are supporting the new system are the ones like you with credit like yours, while those that are complaining foul are those who have invested in the animals - this is the way of free market, those that can do, those that can't wish they could. Then when someone comes along and decides to make us a society where all should get paid equal not matter what they have invested, the ones like you think that is cool(always the majority) while the ones that have invested in the project cry foul.
And from what I can see - you joined the project a few months ago, some of us has been with this since the start, I just passed 7 years of crunch time for this project.

And the big problem we have been seeing is WU's looping,and getting stuck - those like you with one or two machines this is not a problem because you can watch them, but those with large farms or those with small machines that are on the install and forget method, this is a problem, as those WU's will crunch for DAYs before starting over, and crunch for days again, and again - until either the WU or machine is reset. 30 hours of crunch time for 30 credits when it used to take 20 minutes for 30 credits is not what I call better buckets. It is called buckets with holes in them.

And keep CHRIST out of this you friggin idgit!

---

I am here to say goodbye to SETI.

Seems that my first thoughts about the new credit system were right on track.
Seeing as I have systems that used to turn out a unit in about 2 hours and claim there 30 credits. Now it seems the same systems are taking 7 and a half hours to get a credit back of 29. Now looking at the WU I see I didnt get screwed as bad as some did on this unit. You can look at the unit here.

Seems we all turned back in the same claimed credit of 29.73, even though the actaul time crunched on the machines varied from 2.8 hours to 19.1 hours. But hey if we all claimed 29.73 there was no need for the average of the lowest and highest being thrown out now is there.

So much for the bullsh@t we have been fed about getting true credit for the amount of work down.

Now everybody can try to explain it away as being fairer to everybody. But I don't see it. If we was still on the older 4.18, that machine would have turned in almost 4 units, that means 4 times the science, and 4 times the credits.

So from my stand point, the economics of it is this. The machines are costing to much to run now. They will be converted to a project that has direct impact on the quality of life here on this planet.

---

Beach Bums Current Stats:


Come Join us at Hawaiian Beach Bums

I am here to say goodbye to SETI.

Seems that my first thoughts about the new credit system were right on track.
Seeing as I have systems that used to turn out a unit in about 2 hours and claim there 30 credits. Now it seems the same systems are taking 7 and a half hours to get a credit back of 29. Now looking at the WU I see I didnt get screwed as bad as some did on this unit. You can look at the unit here.

Seems we all turned back in the same claimed credit of 29.73, even though the actaul time crunched on the machines varied from 2.8 hours to 19.1 hours. But hey if we all claimed 29.73 there was no need for the average of the lowest and highest being thrown out now is there.

So much for the bullsh@t we have been fed about getting true credit for the amount of work down.

Now everybody can try to explain it away as being fairer to everybody. But I don't see it. If we was still on the older 4.18, that machine would have turned in almost 4 units, that means 4 times the science, and 4 times the credits.

So from my stand point, the economics of it is this. The machines are costing to much to run now. They will be converted to a project that has direct impact on the quality of life here on this planet.

Come join me at Rosetta or SIMAP -

---

[quote]What a load of bull take the donkey and go home. Keep the childish comparisons and just get it all to work and not make us all Beta Testers.

(Snip random offtopic whining about a few bugs)

Heh, that's right, you're pouting and making offtopic complaints, and I'm childish for explaining something.

Perhaps you're mistaken,................

A few random mistakes or errors I'd hate to have you compile a program for me with that type of quality control.
My courses in C or C++ or Cobal or Basic would of failed me for results like this.

Your posting was alot of double speak and meaningless drivel it has nothing to do with the new Seti system because you drew it from an incorrect analogy.

It was fair to expound upon the errors and recomputes because your bucket that was spilling was not water/information but efforts and time as well as the use of equipment and power costs. The carriers were being punished because of poor management and implimentation not careless neglect on the users part.

JUST REMEMBER IN YOUR POSTING WHO SUPPLIED THE BUCKETS and they are defective too boot.

---

Come and Visit Us at
BBR TeamStarFire


****My 9th year of Seti****A Founding Member of the Original Seti Team Starfire at Broadband Reports.com ****

Come join me at Rosetta or SIMAP

I am already crunching there KevinT. I am one of those whiney farm owners running 30+ machines on 8 different projects, well 7 now I guess.

Why don't you come join our team Kevin. SETI.USA will not take over SETI.Germany under the new layout anyway. Why be one of thousands, when you could be one of a few making a differance. We could use the power on the team.

---

Beach Bums Current Stats:


Come Join us at Hawaiian Beach Bums