We have seen that people are credit whores. If there is a way to get more credit than is due, then it will be taken. The only way forward is for the project to do something, but as we have seen with the 4.xx client issue, that is highly unlikely. All's fair in love and BOINCing!

Live long and BOINC!

---

Paul
(S@H1 8888)
And proud of it!

There has been NO official announcement that I can see on the Seti Home Page indicating any change to Seti@home and that people should do something different. I see no new message that MB’s have been released. Going back 1 month on the Homepage NEWs there is NO mention.

+1

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

We have seen that people are credit whores. If there is a way to get more credit than is due, then it will be taken. The only way forward is for the project to do something, but as we have seen with the 4.xx client issue, that is highly unlikely. All's fair in love and BOINCing!

Live long and BOINC!

Hey! I am a credit hound...But updated to the 2.4 as soon as I heard about it...

---

Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!

I would again ask that all optimized app users update to the current science apps. I do not know if Alex's Mac apps have been updated with the correct credit multi or not. If not, I understand, but I would hope tha Alex would correct the situation very soon.

And I would ask even more strongly that the high profile users in the top 100 list (especially the top 20) do what it right and get your rigs in compliance with the project. Do what is right please. I know this is a hard thing to do when you are proud of your current position. You are leading the way in Seti crunching production, please help me set an example and do it within the current set of rules.

Maslatter,

You may forget that most people do not visit theses message boards. How will they ever know unless they start returning invalid results, and than how long will it take them to notice? Hundreds or maybe a few thousand visit these boards daily…not the entire SETI fleet.

Boinc was setup to be hands off software, if that is how you set it up. So if someone is set up for hands off, how would they know?

There has been NO official announcement that I can see on the Seti Home Page indicating any change to Seti@home and that people should do something different. I see no new message that MB’s have been released. Going back 1 month on the Homepage NEWs there is NO mention.

I’ve noticed that most people on these message boards will update to the next version the minute it becomes available. If 5.28 comes out on Monday, you update it. If 5.29 comes out on Thursday, you update it. If 5.30 comes out the next week, you update.

I for 1 update every few months. I’m on these boards and see what is going on. But I’m not going to update every few days, weeks or months unless I have NO choice, which has never happened.

I’m still using 5.8.16 & 5.4.11, I’m still using 2.2b (not to gain credit). I think I noticed 1 or 2 WU’s that got the old (higher) credit than the new apps would have. The reason I don’t update is BECAUSE I read these boards. I see problems people complain of with new apps and don’t want to run into these problems until they are ironed out. There was a problem with Chickens new optimizer when it 1st came out. I’ll sit back for a few weeks or maybe months until I see things are running smooth. There may be many people that feel and do the same as me. Heck, I just got matched up not to long ago on a WU where someone was using a 4.2 application? (something very old).

If amazes me that your complaint is with the USERs. Well than again it really doesn’t.

1 guess whom you should be complaining to/at/about this problem if you feel strongly enough???

~Meow~

My appeal (see the thread title) was to the top 100, and even more, to the top 20 computer's users. Most of the folks in this category and not the 'set and forget' types. If they were, it's unlikely they would have gone to the trouble to upgrade their crunching to optimized in the first place. And I would think that most of them do check the boards often enough.
And if you check my 'possible credit multiplier solution' thread, you will see that I and a few other users proposed a couple of different suggestions aimed at the admins for fixing the differences in claimed credits in the future by taking the credit multi control out of the hands of the app and putting it in the hands of the project instead. So I am appealing both to the users and the admins in an effort to get things fixed.
As far as the Chicken apps go, the few problems I have seen reported are with users running Vista, which I am sure is giving many a programmer nightmares. I am running 2.4 on all rigs without a problem, and the 64 bit version under xp x64 on one of my quads with no problems as well.
As far as an official announcement, I agree that was not handled properly. The announcement should have been made by now.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

As far as an official announcement, I agree that was not handled properly. The announcement should have been made by now.

Announcements are made before events. Well before, for major events.

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Announcements are made before some events.

Announcements are made before some events.

I'm not sure what you are driving at. Are you saying that this change is one that should be made after the event (if ever)?

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Announcements are made before some events.

I'm not sure what you are driving at. Are you saying that this change is one that should be made after the event (if ever)?

I gotta cut the admins a bit of slack, because the MB transition was kind of a running change. Bring a MB spiltter online, see if it runs OK, adjust a bit, try again, etc... It was not a hit the switch and we're ready to go kinda thing. So I can see them not making an announcement before they knew everything was going to keep working. But now that's it's been live for awhile, the official annoncement is overdue.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

I gotta cut the admins a bit of slack, because the MB transition was kind of a running change. Bring a MB spiltter online, see if it runs OK, adjust a bit, try again, etc... It was not a hit the switch and we're ready to go kinda thing. So I can see them not making an announcement before they knew everything was going to keep working. But now that's it's been live for awhile, the official annoncement is overdue.

So why not announce before releasing the new applications and/or the new WUs on the regular project? After all, there is the beta site to test on. So why not? Fair warning, anyone? Frankly, there is no valid claim of cheating with any of the apps until someone officially tells us there has been any kind of change. For all we know, officially, we are still crunching with 5.1x.

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Announcements are made before some events.

I'm not sure what you are driving at. Are you saying that this change is one that should be made after the event (if ever)?

Sometimes it's not possible to make an announcement before an event. Recently, we've had a massive hotel fire here in the UK, in which one person lost their life and two people are still missing. That was certainly 'an event', but it wasn't pre-announced.

Sometimes the announcement is the event. I get very annoyed with so-called 'News' that such-and-such a politician "is going to say ...". Either he/she has said it, or they haven't.

Sometimes an event is a deliberate surprise. An announcement beforehand...

Sometimes things that one group of people class as 'an Event', another group of people might class as a provisional, tentative, toe-in-the-water, reversible, administrative nuance. Either group might be right.

Lots of meanings.

Announcements are made before some events.

I'm not sure what you are driving at. Are you saying that this change is one that should be made after the event (if ever)?

Sometimes it's not possible to make an announcement before an event. Recently, we've had a massive hotel fire here in the UK, in which one person lost their life and two people are still missing. That was certainly 'an event', but it wasn't pre-announced.

Sometimes the announcement is the event. I get very annoyed with so-called 'News' that such-and-such a politician "is going to say ...". Either he/she has said it, or they haven't.

Sometimes an event is a deliberate surprise. An announcement beforehand...

Sometimes things that one group of people class as 'an Event', another group of people might class as a provisional, tentative, toe-in-the-water, reversible, administrative nuance. Either group might be right.

Lots of meanings.

Sure. But this transition was none of those. Are you suggesting is was?

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Sure. But this transition was none of those. Are you suggesting is was?

Well, to be honest, I wan't quite sure about your original post, either.

Was it a question of terminology: if it comes beforehand, it's 'an announcement', but if it comes afterwards, it's 'a report' or 'an explanation'?

Or was it specifically an expressed view that Berkeley should have said, in advance, that they were going to split MB units on such-and-such a day: and put that statement in a much more prominent location than the couple of tid-bits which leaked into Technical News?

I'd agree with Mark that we ought to cut them a bit of slack: it was pre-notified, in a discreet sort of way, that MB was to be released on a Monday - was it one or two weeks ago? - and then a server broke at the weekend and it got put back a couple of days. But I also agree that we should have had some formal, front-page, information by now: and I would also suggest, with the usual hindsight, that it was a bad idea to let MB leak out when fully 25% of the core team - and in this case, arguably Eric would have been the most important member - were known to be out of town.

Or was it specifically an expressed view that Berkeley should have said, in advance, that they were going to split MB units on such-and-such a day: and put that statement in a much more prominent location than the couple of tid-bits which leaked into Technical News?

I'd agree with Mark that we ought to cut them a bit of slack: it was pre-notified, in a discreet sort of way, that MB was to be released on a Monday - was it one or two weeks ago? - and then a server broke at the weekend and it got put back a couple of days. But I also agree that we should have had some formal, front-page, information by now: and I would also suggest, with the usual hindsight, that it was a bad idea to let MB leak out when fully 25% of the core team - and in this case, arguably Eric would have been the most important member - were known to be out of town.

On such-and-such a day? Not necessary. How about:

"Sometime in the next 30 days, we will be releasing new applications, and new WUs. This will require no action required by folks using the standard applications. However, if you are using an optimized application, you must upgrade when the release happens. If not available, you must revert back to the stock application. We will notify you at least one week prior to implementation. Thank you for your support."

How's that?

Oh yeah...BTW, there has till been no official notification. Official notification is defined by a posting on the front page, in the news section (which supports RSS, the way many people here expect to get "news").

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Or was it specifically an expressed view that Berkeley should have said, in advance, that they were going to split MB units on such-and-such a day: and put that statement in a much more prominent location than the couple of tid-bits which leaked into Technical News?

I'd agree with Mark that we ought to cut them a bit of slack: it was pre-notified, in a discreet sort of way, that MB was to be released on a Monday - was it one or two weeks ago? - and then a server broke at the weekend and it got put back a couple of days. But I also agree that we should have had some formal, front-page, information by now: and I would also suggest, with the usual hindsight, that it was a bad idea to let MB leak out when fully 25% of the core team - and in this case, arguably Eric would have been the most important member - were known to be out of town.

On such-and-such a day? Not necessary. How about:

"Sometime in the next 30 days, we will be releasing new applications, and new WUs. This will require no action required by folks using the standard applications. However, if you are using an optimized application, you must upgrade when the release happens. If not available, you must revert back to the stock application. We will notify you at least one week prior to implementation. Thank you for your support."

How's that?

Oh yeah...BTW, there has till been no official notification. Official notification is defined by a posting on the front page, in the news section (which supports RSS, the way many people here expect to get "news").

The BOINC workload manager need a mini web page on it to show project related announcement and news.

who?

i think who is correct about the 3 PC for the quorum ..for the time being till they figure out how to level off the credit claiming for all platforms

it adds 33% more work ... but also negates most of the overclaiming

Speaking on behalf of the few of us who use this single account,

We recognise the ability and individual rights of programmers to modify software to achieve enhanced performance. Indeed it is the natural expression of programmers to undertake such actions when and where it is warrented. A point of interest has been raised here concerning the nature of the enhancements.

We do not disparage any person or software creation in this article, we seek only to focus and clarify current thinking processes. We have at times also ran the enhanced version and now wish to take a step back and rethink the process.


What we would like to raise as discussion points is the following

1- Is the seti management team completly aware of the actual nature of the enhancements made and their impact on the science.

2- Is the enhanced software performing to the expectations of the seti management

3- Is the enhanced software actually checking the work units as thoroughly or indeed as deeply as the seti developed version(s)

4- Is there a performance test that the enhanced versions must go through before they are allowed to be released to the public.

5- Is there a possibility that the science is being misled/corrupted by the enhanced softwares nature and internal actions.

6- Is there a seti management developed version which simply does not have "credits" but instead just asks the user to "run this for the potential value to science",, (as we here would be happy to run it)

cheers

Oh yeah...BTW, there has till been no official notification. Official notification is defined by a posting on the front page, in the news section (which supports RSS, the way many people here expect to get "news").

It was announced that it was going to happen. On the 'Technical News' page, see entries for Jul 30 and Aug 6 (and just about every entry since) for mention of the multibeam app and data.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/tech_news.php

If you are using the anonymous platform to run an optimized app, the onus is on YOU to make sure it is always up-to-date. You got your 'official notification' to upgrade or revert to the stock app when the project started sending out the stock v5.27 app. It is long past time when people should have updated their optimized apps to either a new v5.27-compatible release or (if one is not yet available) reverted to stock. The only reason for someone holding out for some sort of 'official announcement' on the main page of the website's news section is that they want to game the credit system, and that isn't exactly honest.

Speaking on behalf of the few of us who use this single account,

We recognise the ability and individual rights of programmers to modify software to achieve enhanced performance. Indeed it is the natural expression of programmers to undertake such actions when and where it is warrented. A point of interest has been raised here concerning the nature of the enhancements.

We do not disparage any person or software creation in this article, we seek only to focus and clarify current thinking processes. We have at times also ran the enhanced version and now wish to take a step back and rethink the process.


What we would like to raise as discussion points is the following

1- Is the seti management team completly aware of the actual nature of the enhancements made and their impact on the science.

2- Is the enhanced software performing to the expectations of the seti management

3- Is the enhanced software actually checking the work units as thoroughly or indeed as deeply as the seti developed version(s)

4- Is there a performance test that the enhanced versions must go through before they are allowed to be released to the public.

5- Is there a possibility that the science is being misled/corrupted by the enhanced softwares nature and internal actions.

6- Is there a seti management developed version which simply does not have "credits" but instead just asks the user to "run this for the potential value to science",, (as we here would be happy to run it)

cheers

First, I think you might have used the wrong word. 'enhanced' likely should have read 'optimized' in your post.


Ok, now for my personal thoughts and opinions on your 6 points.

1. Yes. The stock clients the project distributes have been made a lot faster by using some the the optimizations people outside the project staff have come up with.

2. I would presume so. The are, after all, using a lot of the optimizer's code in their own stock app.

3. The optimized app's results validate against stock app's, so I would have to say yes.

4. Their authors put them through a lot of testing to make sure they are working right. If one does get released that is bad, well... The bad results are caught in Berkeley's validation process. No credit, and people will quit using it.

5. That is always a danger in an undertaking such as this... And not just from optimized apps, but also from the project's own stock apps... I would rate the risk as very low at this time.

6. Ok..... I don't think so, but you can run the standard, stock app and just not LOOK at your credits... same result. However, the credits serve one important function that has nothing to do with competition. They let you know that things are working correctly and that your computer is not just returning garbage (due to malfunction).

If you are using the anonymous platform to run an optimized app, the onus is on YOU to make sure it is always up-to-date. You got your 'official notification' to upgrade or revert to the stock app when the project started sending out the stock v5.27 app. It is long past time when people should have updated their optimized apps to either a new v5.27-compatible release or (if one is not yet available) reverted to stock. The only reason for someone holding out for some sort of 'official announcement' on the main page of the website's news section is that they want to game the credit system, and that isn't exactly honest.

Agreed - but note that Mac users have been stuck between a rock and a hard place for the last week or two. Either use Alex Kan's optimised app (which overclaims), or revert to the current Berkeley stock app (which overclaims even more).

Problem solved - Alex has released revised optimised apps, which are clearly the correct way forward.

If you are using the anonymous platform to run an optimized app, the onus is on YOU to make sure it is always up-to-date. You got your 'official notification' to upgrade or revert to the stock app when the project started sending out the stock v5.27 app. It is long past time when people should have updated their optimized apps to either a new v5.27-compatible release or (if one is not yet available) reverted to stock. The only reason for someone holding out for some sort of 'official announcement' on the main page of the website's news section is that they want to game the credit system, and that isn't exactly honest.

Agreed - but note that Mac users have been stuck between a rock and a hard place for the last week or two. Either use Alex Kan's optimised app (which overclaims), or revert to the current Berkeley stock app (which overclaims even more).

Problem solved - Alex has released revised optimised apps, which are clearly the correct way forward.

Sure, but while he was working on these new versions, Mr. Kan asked everyone to stop using his old ones.