• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

BWM and Cherry picking

Status
Not open for further replies.
"even as simple as making a statement to confirm the official PG position."

Useless without rule changes and enforcement.

"I've been stuck doing 67xx WU's for days now and would love to get a bigadv or 2"

As has been stated before, this sounds like sour grapes. Do you honestly think with the thousands of boxes folding across the globe, a dozen or so PC's would actually hoard the supply of bigadv? Please.

"in the end IT"S FOR THE SCIENCE, NOT THE POINTS." I call BS on this. You bitch about not getting these choice WU's then say this? Right.


Bottom line: Changes need to be made, and those changes/rules need to be enforced. Don't get pissed at those smart enough to stay within the rules,(or lack of enforcement), already in place to optimize their machines.
Since I know it will be said again, I'll say it for you. No one here advocates deleting WU's and all rules should be followed but unenforced rules are the same as no rules.
 
KWH said:
"even as simple as making a statement to confirm the official PG position."

Useless without rule changes and enforcement.

"I've been stuck doing 67xx WU's for days now and would love to get a bigadv or 2"

As has been stated before, this sounds like sour grapes. Do you honestly think with the thousands of boxes folding across the globe, a dozen or so PC's would actually hoard the supply of bigadv? Please.

"in the end IT"S FOR THE SCIENCE, NOT THE POINTS." I call BS on this. You bitch about not getting these choice WU's then say this? Right.


Bottom line: Changes need to be made, and those changes/rules need to be enforced. Don't get pissed at those smart enough to stay within the rules,(or lack of enforcement), already in place to optimize their machines.
Since I know it will be said again, I'll say it for you. No one here advocates deleting WU's and all rules should be followed but unenforced rules are the same as no rules.
Click to expand...

You are really underestimating the willingness of the majority of folders to follow the recommendations from the PG. The main problem with them since I started folding a few years ago is the lack of communication. For most people, no official word = implicit endorsement for illegal behaviors.

A better communication, like explaining in detail how the servers work to assign units to computers requesting it would be a good eye opener and a excellent way to reduce the incorrect usage. There will always be people around trying to circumvent the system in place for their own gain.
 
The fact is that anyone supporting this kind of behaviour is arguing technicalities. Actions like these are against the spirit of the project even if they are not technically against the rules.
 
"You are really underestimating the willingness of the majority of folders to follow the recommendations from the PG."

That is their choice but they have NO right to bitch when rules aren't being broken or when they are not being enforced. You seen to be confusing your folding morality and the actual problem here, needed rule changes and enforcement.

"There will always be people around trying to circumvent the system in place for their own gain."

Yes, always but if they play within the rules, so what? If nothing happens to rule breakers, what do we then have?
 
Zero82z said:
The fact is that anyone supporting this kind of behaviour is arguing technicalities. Actions like these are against the spirit of the project even if they are not technically against the rules.
Click to expand...

Technicality or not, if it is within the rules, you have no argument. You only have you own moral code and are trying to impose it on others. This presents a new and disturbing set of problems.
 
Zero82z said:
The fact is that anyone supporting this kind of behaviour is arguing technicalities. Actions like these are against the spirit of the project even if they are not technically against the rules.
Click to expand...

What's the "spirit of the project?"

I'd rather see them contribute with hand-chosen WUs than do nothing at all.
 
rflcptr said:
What's the "spirit of the project?"

I'd rather see them contribute with hand-chosen WUs than do nothing at all.
Click to expand...

I for one would rather see them concentrate their efforts on another project instead of F@H if they insist on picking and choosing what they want to run. I'm of the opinion that if you're going to run the F@H client to assist Stanford with this ongoing project, then you're accepting *whatever* WU the Stanford servers assign to you to process. That includes everything, not just -bigadv units. When you download and install that client, then that should be the standard that *ever single one of us* accept. Anything less than that is simply a blatent disregard for the rules and intentions of Stanford and the entire F@H project, not to mention total disregard for the thousands of other folders out there who willingly use their equipment, electricity, time and monies to support the project as intended.

If you have to bend the rules or create special scripts in order to circumvent getting WU's that Stanford assigns to your equipment, then you're simply not operating within acceptable standards.
 
rflcptr said:
What's the "spirit of the project?"

I'd rather see them contribute with hand-chosen WUs than do nothing at all.
Click to expand...
People, you are ignoring the fact that somebody has to fold these units. No matter what. So, if the horde and evga don’t fold the 6701 units, then tpu and ocn and ocau would have to fold them. If all of those teams refuse to fold 6701 units, then other teams have to fold the units, and so on. End result is, somebody, somewhere, will be stuck with folding the bad units. Eventually, the good units would dry up, and we would have a lot of idle rigs.

Also, it would create a backlog of 6701 work, thus significantly harming the project. Bigadv work would get folded ahead of schedule, but 6701 work would lag significantly behind, and would greatly harm the science.
 
Eventually, the good units would dry up, and we would have a lot of idle rigs.
Click to expand...
LOL! Your statement doesn't hold because people will still look to make POINTS POINTS POINTS, regardless of WU availability.
 
Bigadv work would get folded ahead of schedule, but 6701 work would lag significantly behind, and would greatly harm the science.
Click to expand...
Calling BS on this, too. Exactly how many machines are even capable of Bigadv work? 6701 work will not "lag significantly behind."
 
rflcptr said:
LOL! Your statement doesn't hold because people will still look to make POINTS POINTS POINTS, regardless of WU availability.
Click to expand...
no, BWM's script specifically avoids "bad" units. They will never fold a bad WU. It will sit idle, continually refreshing in an attempt to find bigadv WUs. A system like that is the only way to achieve the sort of WU discrimination you're talking about here.
 
rflcptr said:
Calling BS on this, too. Exactly how many machines are even capable of Bigadv work? 6701 work will not "lag significantly behind."
Click to expand...
judging by the high percentage of 6701 work we are being assigned these days, there is a lot of 6701 work that needs to be done.

Bigadv rigs are being assigned 6701 at a very high rate, and that means there is a ton of processing power out there that pande, for whatever reason, has assigned to 6701 units. If those bigadv rigs all refused to fold 6701s, it would make a big dent in the available processing power available to crunch 6701s.
 
jebo_4jc said:
no, BWM's script specifically avoids "bad" units. They will never fold a bad WU. A system like that is the only way to achieve the sort of WU discrimination you're talking about here.
Click to expand...
Way to dodge the point. If every Bigadv unit was exhausted, do you really buy your own argument that people will still not allow the others and not continue contribution?

jebo_4jc said:
judging by the high percentage of 6701 work we are being assigned these days, there is a lot of 6701 work that needs to be done.

Bigadv rigs are being assigned 6701 at a very high rate, and that means there is a ton of processing power out there that pande, for whatever reason, has assigned to 6701 units. If those bigadv rigs all refused to fold 6701s, it would make a big dent in the available processing power available to crunch 6701s.
Click to expand...
6701s can be targeted to many more machines than Bigadv can.
 
rflcptr said:
Way to dodge the point. If every Bigadv unit was exhausted, do you really buy your own argument that people will still not allow the others and not continue contribution?
Click to expand...
I don't know. BWM has stated their belief that 6701 units are unsatisfactory in no uncertain terms.

They've gone way out of their way to ensure that their rigs will categorically discriminate against 6701 units.

I don't know what other people can do, I can't guess. I'm basing my statements on the mechanics of BWM's methodology.
 
Last edited:
jebo_4jc said:
judging by the high percentage of 6701 work we are being assigned these days, there is a lot of 6701 work that needs to be done.

Bigadv rigs are being assigned 6701 at a very high rate, and that means there is a ton of processing power out there that pande, for whatever reason, has assigned to 6701 units. If those bigadv rigs all refused to fold 6701s, it would make a big dent in the available processing power available to crunch 6701s.
Click to expand...

I gotta call BS here too. You talk like BWM have thousands of boxes and are sucking up all the choice WU's. If it was all about the science, this wouldn't even be an issue, would it.
Have you read the F@H EULA? If not, please do. If their script only chooses what they download, they are not altering the software or associated data files, or de-compile or reverse engineer the software.
In other words, they found loopholes they can use to maximize their machines. A ruling needs to be made here.

I can't see what is so hard to understand about this. Make rules, clarify the rules and enforce said rules. Imposing your feelings or folding morality on others is plain wrong. Your choosing to "fold to a higher standard" is just that, your choice. If this was about religion what stand would you take?
 
jebo is correct in saying that if everyone did this 6701 would lag significantly behind (along with other regular SMP WUs)

If you look at the Server Status page you will see a column named "Weight" - this is how frequently the AS will assign you to a work server. The higher the number the greater amount of times you will be assigned to that server, Zero =never.

looking at the bigadv server its set at 10000, and the regular SMP server is at 40000. Therefore, you have a 400% greater chance of getting a regular SMP unit.
 
nitrobass24 said:
jebo is correct in saying that if everyone did this 6701 would lag significantly behind (along with other regular SMP WUs)
Click to expand...
Again, of course, assuming everyone had a Bigadv-capable machine. But we all know this is nowhere near true.
 
nitrobass24 said:
jebo is correct in saying that if everyone did this 6701 would lag significantly behind (along with other regular SMP WUs)

If you look at the Server Status page you will see a column named "Weight" - this is how frequently the AS will assign you to a work server. The higher the number the greater amount of times you will be assigned to that server, Zero =never.

looking at the bigadv server its set at 10000, and the regular SMP server is at 40000. Therefore, you have a 400% greater chance of getting a regular SMP unit.
Click to expand...



Perhaps this needs to happen to get a ruling on this.
Once these WU's are gone, then everyone will have the same WU. I don't see the problem. If they are backing up then why isn't something being done about it?
 
They arent backing up because most people are not circumventing the system.
Stanford put this weighting in place to ensure certain types of WU would get done. If they didnt you would get a bigadv everytime if one was available.
 
again this comes back to communication, but stanford does monitor this stuff and puts measures in place to keep things balanced.
 
nitrobass24 said:
They arent backing up because most people are not circumventing the system.
Stanford put this weighting in place to ensure certain types of WU would get done. If they didnt you would get a bigadv everytime if one was available.
Click to expand...

And to my knowledge, F@H is up and running normally. WU's are being folded and results are being sent back. Circumventing, cheating, loopholes are all different ways of demeaning BWM and others for using rules in place to their advantage. This will ALWAYS happen when humans are involved.
 
Its not a rule!! cant you read?

Yes, blocking IPs has been discussed before its not like you need a PHD as they claim to do this.

Because this is a community based project there are not "Rules" but ethical standards do still apply and doing something like blacklisting IPs to alter the WU received is not in the spirit of the project or what the project administrators want to happen (Hence the AS Weightings).
 
nitrobass24 said:
Its not a rule!! cant you read?

Yes, blocking IPs has been discussed before its not like you need a PHD as they claim to do this.

Because this is a community based project there are not "Rules" but ethical standards do still apply and doing something like blacklisting IPs to alter the WU received is not in the spirit of the project or what the project administrators want to happen (Hence the AS Weightings).
Click to expand...

And thus are not valid. Can't you even comprehend the tripe you just wrote? Push to fix the broken system! Same rules for all and enforce them.
Spirits, ghosts, weightings and musings aren't rules changes.
 
KWH said:
And thus are not valid. Can't you even comprehend the tripe you just wrote? Push to fix the broken system! Same rules for all and enforce them.
Spirits, ghosts, weightings and musings aren't rules changes.
Click to expand...
that's like saying cheating the tax system is the best way to encourage changes in tax laws
 
rflcptr said:
Again, of course, assuming everyone had a Bigadv-capable machine. But we all know this is nowhere near true.
Click to expand...
no, this is not a required assumption. why do you think this line of reasoning requires that assumption?
 
jebo_4jc said:
Dr. Kasson has specifically spoken out against this sort of behavior.
http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=15069&p=149331&hilit=block+ip#p149346
Click to expand...

Let me make it as simple as I can. Spirits, ghosts, weightings and musings aren't rules changes and will deter NOTHING. Wasted typing space and bandwidth.
You seem to think in terms of black and white but when presented a black and white case, you somehow shut down.

It's not cheating if the rules don't state so. Musings don't count.
 
jebo_4jc said:
that's like saying cheating the tax system is the best way to encourage changes in tax laws
Click to expand...

And yet this would work extremely fast. Your are comparing apples and condoms. One has established, ever changing rules(for loopholes) and enforcement, the other does not. You made my case for me but fail to comprehend it.
 
KWH said:
And yet this would work extremely fast. Your are comparing apples and condoms. One has established, ever changing rules(for loopholes) and enforcement, the other does not. You made my case for me but fail to comprehend it.
Click to expand...
you're right that there is a big difference between the US tax code and a donor-driven science project. I was speaking by analogy which, by definition, is inexact.

Your point is valid that there is no "rule" against blocking/circumventing IP addresses of certain servers.

However, Dr. Kasson has expressly condemned this behavior because it harms the project. That goes well beyond a "musing", and is enough of a definitive statement for those of us who have the good of the project in mind to avoid this sort of behavior.

Your argument would break down if the client EULA or the "FAQ/Policies" page expressly condoned IP blocking. That is probably what the Pande group should do.
 
KWH said:
Let me make it as simple as I can. Spirits, ghosts, weightings and musings aren't rules changes and will deter NOTHING. Wasted typing space and bandwidth.
You seem to think in terms of black and white but when presented a black and white case, you somehow shut down.

It's not cheating if the rules don't state so. Musings don't count.
Click to expand...
So the Doctor who started the project saying this isn't good enough for you? It's just a "musing"?

Either fold every WU that comes your way, or get off F@H. If you're trying to argue technicalities for why it's not wrong, you just don't get it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
KWH said:
Let me make it as simple as I can. Spirits, ghosts, weightings and musings aren't rules changes and will deter NOTHING. Wasted typing space and bandwidth.
You seem to think in terms of black and white but when presented a black and white case, you somehow shut down.

It's not cheating if the rules don't state so. Musings don't count.
Click to expand...
What do you expect PG to do? If it's their version of the Constitution you're going to be waiting for a long time because it won't happen. PG have stated over and over in the past that WU deletion is harmful to the research for reasons I and others mentioned here and elsewhere. This script in effect causes the same or similar issues that have serious consequences down the line even if WUs are not deleted. Why partake or even defend a practice that has known deleterious consequences to the project one has decided to participate in? Why??

Kasson stated in his FF post unambiguously that WU blocking, i.e. selection, is inappropriate behavior and grounds for action. That alone speaks volumes to me about consequences and the rationale behind them. Designing a script that accomplishes the same goal as the topic of that thread is worse because it can be distributed to the community at large, affecting the course of the project and its integrity. There is explosive potential here none have mentioned. All it takes is for BWM to send their script to one other person and this thing goes viral...
 
"Your argument would break down if the client EULA or the "FAQ/Policies" page expressly condoned IP blocking. That is probably what the Pande group should do."


BINGO! My argument would stand in court of law because the rules are NOT specific.

Restrictions:

You may use this software on a computer system only if you own the system or have the written permission of the owner.

You may not alter the software or associated data files, or de-compile or reverse engineer the software.

You may only use unmodified versions of Folding@home obtained through authorized distributors to connect to the Folding@Home servers. Use of other software to connect to the Folding@home servers is strictly prohibited. This prohibition includes 3rd party installers which download directly from Stanford web sites, unless written permission is granted from Stanford University.

How many here alone violate these simple rules?

As long as these few rules are followed, you are playing within the rules. Simple.

"However, Dr. Kasson has expressly condemned this behavior because it harms the project. That goes well beyond a "musing", and is enough of a definitive statement for those of us who have the good of the project in mind to avoid this sort of behavior."

Once again, musings aren't rules changes. Your folding morality does not apply.
What is needed are cold. hard rules and enforcement.

I have an idea, why doesn't the PG hire BWM as consultants, since they seem to know the ins and outs of folding?
 
"So the Doctor who started the project saying this isn't good enough for you? It's just a "musing"?"

Have the rules been changed? Have they? Pretty simple question.

"How about you fuck off, and leave folding to those people who care about WHAT's being folded for, not about a bunch of fucking meaningless "points"?
"
Careful, your maturity is showing. I guess only opinions you approve of count? Good job. Strip your points, you'd walk.

"Either fold every WU that comes your way, or get off F@H. If you're trying to argue technicalities for why it's not wrong, you just don't get it."

Problem is, I DO get it. Obviously YOU do not.


"What do you expect PG to do? If it's their version of the Constitution you're going to be waiting for a long time because it won't happen."

Then everyone needs to get off their high horses and just fold. Bitching about someone generating more PPD within the rules is absurd.

"All it takes is for BWM to send their script to one other person and this thing goes viral"
If that is what it takes for PG to act, I all for it.

"Why partake or even defend a practice that has known deleterious consequences to the project one has decided to participate in? Why??
"

Simple and you know what it is: PPD
Lack of rules updates and penalties makes all this possible. If you all want to bitch at someone, cast your eyes at PG.
 
KWH said:
Once again, musings aren't rules changes. Your folding morality does not apply.
What is needed are cold. hard rules and enforcement.
Click to expand...

You're arguments are just pathetic. Yes, the morality applies, because it's the SPIRIT OF THE PROJECT. And since you don't seem to get what that means, here's it even more simply: FOLDING EVERY WU IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO, BECAUSE THE WUS ARE THERE TO BE WORKED. You're hurting the project. Period. Delude yourself all you want; the rest of us fold for more than points.

And no, "Strip your points, you'd walk."

Here are my points:
0.png


Do you really think I give a shit if they were taken away? I fold, because I have relatives with Alzheimers, Parkinsons and a couple protein-related diseases, and I want to see a cure in my lifetime. I've folded since long before there were "points" and "folding farms" and people buying SR2s just to get 100k+ PPD. Back when people gave a shit about THE SCIENCE, which you cherry-pickers obviously care nothing about.

EDIT: And, stop arguing like this is law. The fact you need to justify it using the idea of legal loopholes just further proves how wrong you are.
 
Last edited:
KWH said:
"However, Dr. Kasson has expressly condemned this behavior because it harms the project. That goes well beyond a "musing", and is enough of a definitive statement for those of us who have the good of the project in mind to avoid this sort of behavior."

Once again, musings aren't rules changes. Your folding morality does not apply.
What is needed are cold. hard rules and enforcement.
Click to expand...
KWH, what Dr. Kasson stated are not musings. The fact his statements do not jive with your sense of legality and 'lawful conduct' does not invalidate his statements in regards to the sound continuity of scientific research and development. His statements are authoritative because they are steeped in the experience and knowledge of the project you or I cannot compare with. This is NOT a legal issue, it is an intellectual one. Scientific research is NOT to be equated with legal issues - they are not the same and therefore require different set of standards to be evaluated by.
 
I've GOT IT!

I am going to email the PG that folks here in Team 33 are an honourable bunch.

They shall be given the right to call anyone they feel is not living to their standards cheats, fuckers, assholes, mofos.

The rules are simple, whatever Team 33 elite group thinks is againts the "spirit" of the community goes.

They shall have the right to ban, remove their points and post their pictures on the internet with appropriate titles.

"And then they came for me."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top