Thanks for the reply. Yeah, looking at cpdn as well, but on top of wondering about the system resource use, don't "feel" it at all. And, frankly, I've been rather tired of the climate discussion even before Paris, not to mention even more recent times. It's just one symptom of what we're doing to this planet, we know what to do to prevent things from getting even worse, it's not the science/knowledge that's lacking, it's the will, be it of those in power or of the vast majority of average people, when it comes to implementing the drastic changes needed and not just expressing concern or at most doing little "bright green" stuff.
Er, ahem, off topic...
The issue with WCG is that it's a different thing, another layer between the BOINC... ecosystem and the actual project. Doesn't really matter how that affects things in practical terms, or if it even does at all, it just makes me feel it's not the same.

---

The issue with WCG is that it's a different thing, another layer between the BOINC... ecosystem and the actual project. It doesn't really matter how that affects things in practical terms, or if it even does at all, it just makes me feel it's not the same.

There are a couple of different project aggregators out there besides WCG. On WCG you can't get at those individual projects directly. But you can choose to run only one project and have your results be strickly from that project.

Tom

---

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association).

Well, that's sad. Really sad. Especially since we recently donated to up the infrastructure.
I guess SETI died today. Ben fun. Member since 2000. Project detached.
Doing lots over at WCG though.

---

Another important thing to consider among all the teeth gnashing is that this scientific data must be verified by a trustworthy source as it is peer reviewed/published/etc., and the simple fact is that not one of us is a trustworthy source*. Not in the eyes of the scientific community. If something is found, questions along the lines of "can you prove this isn't faked" come along. While the distributed nature of BOINC work units protects against that somewhat, this method of research has not been vetted yet. IF and when the actual researchers (who are a trustworthy source) publish their papers and they survive scrutiny, the method will be one step closer to being vetted. At some point when doing research, it is necessary for a small and select group- the researchers- to take the data by the horns, make it theirs, and account for all conclusions, failings, and questions at a single point of contact.

That time is now from all indications. While it is possible that a new system could also analyze this data through distributed computing, that is not what this data needs. Not if the results, whatever they turn out to be, are to mean anything.

Find another project, there are many worthwhile out there. Watch for the day SETI or its successors return, if they do. There is more science to be done.

*(If the researchers were also crunching, that would be the exception to my statement. And understand that I am not saying anyone here is untrustworthy, but that in the eyes of the scientific community we all are)

---

This makes no sense. What has our computing power been doing for 20 years??

---

I think SETI was just a distraction!!

Maybe we have been mining bitcoins. Lol

I thought we were listening for anomalous signals!

If what my computers have analyzed needs to be reanalyzed, then why isn't our computers doing it to help out?

True.

Bummer, but I wasn't surprised. I noticed the dates of our tasks were fairly recent. I figured all our home computer processing power got faster and faster and basically we caught up to the data generated.

Please send us a notification when we need to reactivate like mech warriors.

Ya! And I`m gonna be colder in my room!

Bummer, but I wasn't surprised. I noticed the dates of our tasks were fairly recent. I figured all our home computer processing power got faster and faster and basically we caught up to the data generated.

Please send us a notification when we need to reactivate like mech warriors.

Good point!

Appointment in 1000 years with the Space Invaders !

---

Tom you are correct about E@H, I've crunching there full time for many years.
Your statement about GPUGRID coincides with my limited experience there.
Collatz made me feel stupider than normal, trying to disprove what seems to me is a logical regression is a waste of brain cells and electricity

From the little I've done so far, MilkyWay seems pretty well behaved, and has both CPU and OpenCL work. Just beware the N-Body tasks, as one task takes all CPU cores and threads at once. Surprising, if you're not expecting it.

---

Oops......

We're excited to finish up our original science project, and we look forward to what comes next.

It should be new search with new types of patterns and new freq. bands.

---

SETI apps news
We're not gonna fight them. We're gonna transcend them.

Well, I hope SETI boards will alive still. Would be good if SETI core team will still post updates from time to time on Nebula or alternative SETI projects.
And maybe some volunteer involvment would be still possible in some new form.

---

SETI apps news
We're not gonna fight them. We're gonna transcend them.

Question about how BOINC works: If you set projects with a resource share of zero, does it ignore them until you enter a higher number even if it'll end up idle or does it first look at any with a higher share but if there's no work from those it asks for work from zero-share ones too?

---

Question about how BOINC works: If you set projects with a resource share of zero, does it ignore them until you enter a higher number even if it'll end up idle or does it first look at any with a higher share but if there's no work from those it asks for work from zero-share ones too?

My limited experience seems to indicate it will not download any "0" resource projects until the system runs out of competing projects. This is with Einstein@Home set to "0".

I am sorry, I don't have in info on the polling when it is set for "0" and has competing tasks.

Tom

---

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association).

It has occurred to me that after the Staff gets done with the analysis that DA has written about (eg. Look for ET and produced one or more Paper(s) on quantifying the sensitivity of the search/data analysis) that a much-reduced version of the project running on a much smaller set of servers processing only the AstroPulse tasks might be do-able.

The point would be to provide something more to be analyzed that doesn't turn into a massive time sink for the S@H staff. It seems to me that AP provides more general science results as well as supporting ET searching https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/ap_faq.php .

I wonder if it would be possible for a select # of higher-end volunteers to perform "splitting" out in the field? This would take a considerable load off the servers but increase the amount of bandwidth consumed shuttling the raw, unsplit data over the Internet.

Tom M

---

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association).