Change in BA requirements

orion said:
looks like Bill lost another post :(

and all for getting ready to be flamed :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No, I deleted it. I am tired, and I feel like I am talking to the wall.
I get better answers when I talk to my dog. She looks at me, turns her head and gives me her paw. I have a good Idea what she wants. Play, go PP or food.

What the flame thing was about I was going to say 1 point for 1 wu, those who want to and can afford to, can spend as much as they want to. Fold what ever makes them feel good inside.
And if you think this is bad over points, just wait until cure coin takes off and you add money to the mix!!!!!! I can't wait to see that!!!!

GTX780 are 500$ each here in the US, I am not sure where you are.
But anyway the GPU folders are not upset about the BA points, it is the regular SMP points they base the GPU point on. So to raise the SMP points to please the 16/24 core server crowd, and to get the SMP work done. They need to raise the points for GPU. =pay for = work then raise the GPU points. Or they will say =pay for=work. Again it's a cycle.
I maybe wrong, most likely am. But that's what I see going on.
 
Last edited:
=pay for= work?

Where's my seniority bonus? Been folding a long time. doesn't seem to mean anything to anyone.

BTW -- this thread and the FF have been highly amusing. In the long run, points really don't mean anything other than bragging rights. I'm helping out with a cause (or so I've been led to believe all these years.. .if not, I'll stop). With all the drama, I'm a bit soured at folding... may just pack it in and wander off and spend my cycles on something else.
 
orion said:
Who knows?

The DAB Forum is closed to us so we have no idea what has been talked about or when it was discussed.
Click to expand...

The DAB is a wasted effort. We all know that except those that chose to find fairy dust among a pile of dragon dung.

It's been dead... long time. Even Deadpool would bitch about being waken this time around.
 
Core32 said:
You are apparently not listening................Vijay has told us to STICK IT.......many times.
Click to expand...
Adak said:
Prove it!!
Click to expand...
KMac said:
Why did you not ask ChasR (Your DAB rep) to submit your ideas to PG on your team's behalf? ;)
Click to expand...
Adak said:
Because ChasR is no longer active on the team forum. Is he still active with DAB?
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point. DAB was ineffective and is dead for whatever reason, but to me it seems like another example of donor concerns being ignored by PG.

Two of the three stated primary agenda items for DAB are still the main issues the donors are upset about today, two years later.

And history repeats itself once again...
 
KMac said:
Why did you not ask ChasR (Your DAB rep) to submit your ideas to PG on your team's behalf? ;)
Click to expand...

On my team forum, I was requested to contact ChasR and HayesK also, regarding this matter.

I have sent a PM to each of the above, re: the FF thread, with a link to it.

Heaven help them! :p
 
Bill1024 said:
My hexcore AMD-1045T was o/c to 3.6ghz and used to get 18k or so on regular smp.
Now I am lucky to get 10k ppd.
I would not mind doing smp, but why the big reduction if they need more to fold them?
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Got same results with my 1090T which was replaced by a 3770K which still gets 30K ppd on smp with less heat and power draw but I've had to reduce overall folding for power cost reasons in the last few months. I've taken several older GPUs (GTX400/HD5000) off folding for the same reasons. I like to contribute and still inform/encourage others to do so but it gets expensive quickly
 
Toconator said:
Totally agree. Got same results with my 1090T which was replaced by a 3770K which still gets 30K ppd on smp with less heat and power draw but I've had to reduce overall folding for power cost reasons in the last few months. I've taken several older GPUs (GTX400/HD5000) off folding for the same reasons. I like to contribute and still inform/encourage others to do so but it gets expensive quickly
Click to expand...

Yep, it sure does. A few months back, I sold all my previous generation GPUs and got two used 7970s. Luckily it was when GPUs were no longer viable for bitcoin mining, so there were some on the market at a decent price. That and my 4P are all I run now. Still good for ~800k in total when the AS isn't broken and I'm not on a 8101. ;)
 
These are the recommendations most everyone agreed with, and brief notes to put them in context.


1)
A clear longer term road map, accurate for at least the next six months, preferably for a year.

[88888 Folders will be looking to buy hardware, with folding as one big priority. Drop the "don't buy hardware for FAH" concept.
[88888 It will happen frequently. That's just human nature.

[88888 Immediate road map for the BA threshold is critical. In addition, include GPU and SMP changes for that same time period.


2)
Limit changes to the BA threshold, to one per year. We want to fold BA wu's, but we can't keep up with three threshold changes in less than one year!

[88888 a) More info on why the threshold is being raised. Especially "why so much and so often?".


3)
A healthy increase in SMP points. The points per day per Watt, are so low the SMP wu's are viewed as not worth the cost to fold them.

[88888 a) They aren't worth folding for any GPU folder.

[88888 b) They are a huge drop in points, for ex-BA rigs. More than a 60% drop was reported on some wu's.

[88888 c) Substantial boost is needed to provide the incentive to fold SMP wu's.


4)
Clearer communication, and more of it. There is a broad feeling that PG isn't listening to the donors. The announcements or replies from PG are typically lacking any specific information.

[88888 The recent BA threshold increase announcement, is one good example of that. Typical response: "He wrote a lot without saying much of anything".

[88888 Mentioning the threshold increases without giving specifics on the deadline changes. Leaves many BA folders incredibly stressed out.
[88888Several have reported they are no longer folding, just because of the stress they feel about this.


5)
We need a non-scientist, but knowledgeable person, to serve as a communicator for the project. Someone who can speak for PG, on the forum, regularly.

[88888 Having the moderators give us guesses regarding PG, is not enough.


6)
We need a great deal more empathy from the moderators. Whether their post is concise or verbose, the attitude of moderator vs. donor, and the condescension we've seen in the past, must stop.

[88888 We need to turn the harsh replies, like: "You're not being rational", or "That's a stupid idea", into "Have you studied that idea in depth?", or "I think there's a
[88888 better way, what do you think about this? ...".

[88888 The moderators give a great deal of info out (A+ in that department), but have fallen into a "donor versus PG or donor vs. moderator", attitude, far too often.
[88888Having fallen into this "us vs them" trap before on another forum, I can attest it's all too easy to slip into it. Nevertheless, it must be avoided. The moderators
[88888are in many cases, the most frequently read "face" of FAH. We need a lot more positive words of encouragement, (like a smile, but in words), and a lot less of
[88888"this is the way it is, take it or leave it", type of replies.

The above were compiled from the PM's sent to me, the BA threshold thread in FF, and on [H]ardOCP's BA change thread.

Your comments are welcome.
 
Last edited:
I like the first long term roadmap and communication points. If I'm buying a new piece of hardware for the project the three factors I look at are upfront cost, power usage, and the "usefulness to the project". The first two are easy to track and don't suddenly change on me, it would also be nice if "usefulness to the project" (aka PPD) did not either. Knowing that the "usefulness" of hardware I'm investing in won't arbitrary drop 60% in several months makes it a much less risky investment and I'm therefore willing to stretch the budget a bit more.

For example: Ideally if Stanford wants to make it favorable to invest in very fast multi socket systems they should:
1. Post to the blog that there is a long term need for multi socket
2. Back it up with a point system such as bigadv that offer optimal PPD/$ and PPD/W and say something like "We do not expect to tighten bigadv deadlines for at least 24 months."
3. Publicly communicate expected drastic changes to the point system as far in the future as possible

This could also work for a new GPU core etc. If Stanford says what they want and how long the points will last it makes it better for everyone because we can choose the right hardware.
 
somecallmeTim said:
In the long run, points really don't mean anything...
Click to expand...

In the long run, nothing really matters. :D

In the short term, points are absolutely relevant. Points are the way that PG communicates how much research donors are achieving. Changes in the point structure result in behavior changes among F@H donors because we are responding to what PG tells us is getting the most research accomplished (and this is particularly true among F@H's biggest donors, because they react most quickly to changes). It is not a tenable stance for PG to ignore or dismiss the impact that these decisions have on their top donors, and in the same way, it is not realistic to argue that points don't really mean anything.

I do agree with you completely that the constant drama surrounding F@H - which is a direct result of PG's inability to handle donor relations appropriately - does sour enthusiasm for folding among a large portion of the enthusiast community.



Adak said:
2)
Limit changes to the BA threshold, to one per year. We want to fold BA wu's, but we can't keep up with three threshold changes in less than one year!

[88888 a) More info on why the threshold is being raised. Especially "why so much and so often?".
Click to expand...

The focus shouldn't be on the frequency of threshold changes, but why there needs to be a threshold at all (unless we are just giving up on that). I guess this is what the question in 2a is alluding to, but I think we need to be more direct and demand transparency on the part of PG. If the issue is getting BA units back faster than what low-core BA folders are doing now, then a time limit would be a much better solution (and could perhaps be supplemented by adjustments to the ERB). If the issue is getting more BA folders switched over to SMP, then PG needs to fix the incentive scheme.
 
shrae said:
The focus shouldn't be on the frequency of threshold changes, but why there needs to be a threshold at all (unless we are just giving up on that). I guess this is what the question in 2a is alluding to, but I think we need to be more direct and demand transparency on the part of PG. If the issue is getting BA units back faster than what low-core BA folders are doing now, then a time limit would be a much better solution (and could perhaps be supplemented by adjustments to the ERB). If the issue is getting more BA folders switched over to SMP, then PG needs to fix the incentive scheme.
Click to expand...

Limits on number of changes and transparency are kind of independent issues, aren't they?

Even if transparency issue is resolved to donors' satisfaction, they will still need something
akin to limits... That is, I wouldn't want threshold changed every 2 months no matter how
warranted...

Also, some say contracts aren't written for good times but for bad times. I would very much
like to have a set limit of changes... for bad times.
 
Last edited:
shrae said:
The focus shouldn't be on the frequency of threshold changes, but why there needs to be a threshold at all (unless we are just giving up on that).
Click to expand...
Perhaps item #3 could be integrated in #4 as an example of poor comms, as excess of SMP units still remains a rumor.
 
Kasson has already made a preliminary reply in the FF, and stated there would be action taken soon. Naturally, they have to talk things out first. No evidence of hearty laughter.

Taking the negative outlook on a problem, frequently leads people to get discouraged and quit. I don't want to have that happen, at this time. If things can't work out, there is always time to choose another project, later on.

In the past, FAH has had some rough patches, but you know what they say you gotta have: FAITH! :D
 
Methinks Kasson really doesn't get what we are saying, or he really doesn't give a shit.

"Re: Change in BA requirements

Postby kasson » Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:16 pm

We understand that donors may decide to redirect their priorities. We are thankful for all donations that people have made in the past.

On a separate note, there has been a fair amount of discussion about ways to make the points system (and large work units) more consistent and predictable for donors. All of these things rest upon Dr. Pande's approval, so unfortunately I can't say anything until he makes the call."
 
The first line sums it up quite well, no need for an interpreter there.
 
2nd sentence in 1st line:

They thank donors for donation in the PAST .... not now or later ... kakaka .. they don't need your donation no more :p
 
Bill1024 said:
GTX780 are 500$ each here in the US, I am not sure where you are.
But anyway the GPU folders are not upset about the BA points, it is the regular SMP points they base the GPU point on. So to raise the SMP points to please the 16/24 core server crowd, and to get the SMP work done. They need to raise the points for GPU. =pay for = work then raise the GPU points. Or they will say =pay for=work. Again it's a cycle.
I maybe wrong, most likely am. But that's what I see going on.
Click to expand...
You are not wrong! And I live in Norway where every things is very expencive. A GTX 780 cost around 5000 kroner as is about $850, and I chosen to use $800 as a regular price for the place, but it is maybe a little low. $500 is a dream price for us!
 
So to raise the SMP points to please the 16/24 core server crowd, and to get the SMP work done. They need to raise the points for GPU. =pay for = work then raise the GPU points. Or they will say =pay for=work. Again it's a cycle.
I maybe wrong, most likely am. But that's what I see going on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, except they would not need to raise points for GPU per say, they would go up in tandem automatically because the new GPU core 17 is bench-marked on the smp machine...at least that is what they said...when I watched the qrb for GPU it did not scale completely....there appeared to be an artificial ceiling...proteener, nor anyone else would comment on it...it was just the way it was..

:D
 
sbinh said:
2nd sentence in 1st line:

They thank donors for donation in the PAST .... not now or later ... kakaka .. they don't need your donation no more :p
Click to expand...

Yes, there is a potential risk ... that together with Vijay's quote as referred by tear: older Google nodes are less noisy/complaining compared to a bunch of donors ... :(

I still like FAH project and would like to see we overcome the trouble ... But ... :confused:

just testing einstein@home and poem@home on my linux testbench
 
Already moved to WCG... the statement alone from Vijay indicates to me a disdain for donors in general.
 
sbinh said:
2nd sentence in 1st line:

They thank donors for donation in the PAST .... not now or later ... kakaka .. they don't need your donation no more :p
Click to expand...

Since several of the posters have taken the position that they are not now, or will not be folding for FAH in the future - wouldn't it be ODD to thank them for folding in the present or the future?

Really? The best you can do is to pick apart some inference in syntax, that was never meant to begin with, and slime Kasson and FAH with it?

Rather pathetic.
 
Wow. Just wow. Having finally taken the time to read this entire thread, I have to agree with some of my fellow old timers that have repeatedly pointed out that all this is remarkably similar to our past experiences. I wish the best of luck to all of you, but based on history with Vijay's lack of regard for us folders, I'd recommend you don't hold your breath!

Part of the reason we founded the [H]ard|DC Commandos years ago was 1) many of us were tired of this same crap, but between the GPU and SMP WUs. We discovered that there are dozens of other worthy projects out there, and pretty much ALL without the politics of F@H. And 2) adding in the fun of trying to conquer the rankings over at the DC Vault, we have just as much fun as the [H]orde does during the EVGA and overtake Default pushes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm damn proud of the 12M points I have in F@H, and came back to test the waters again while helping with the Default push. And I'll be sure to come back if/when the need ever arises again. But for now, I'm SOOOO glad I didn't go spend money on that Socket F rig I was planning last year, and I'll be heading back over to the BOINC fun! Feel free to stop in and say hi - we'd love to have you, even if it is just a temporary break until Vijay & Co. get their heads out of their asses...
 
Last edited:
Adak said:
Since several of the posters have taken the position that they are not now, or will not be folding for FAH in the future - wouldn't it be ODD to thank them for folding in the present or the future?

Really? The best you can do is to pick apart some inference in syntax, that was never meant to begin with, and slime Kasson and FAH with it?

Rather pathetic.
Click to expand...

F@H drama is a pain and you are not helping. Stanford's views seem to perpetually differ from those of the enthusiast donors which is unfortunate but the layers of forum moderators and representatives in between seem to only stir up disagreement. Everyone can read what Stanford says and either be happy with the news or be disappointed at the inaction. Personally attacking other folders doesn't fix the actual problem.
 
No one is defending FAH's communications practices. There are real issues there.

But it's pathetic to slime someone because they thanked all those who have donated, but did not yet thank those who have not donated.

THAT is the kind of post that is most unhelpful, because it takes the standard of etiquette, far beyond anything Miss Manners (Judith Martin), would recognize as proper. I'm all for etiquette, but when you twist it around to what you THINK might be proper (and isn't), and use that misinformation to smear someone - yes, that IS pathetic.
 
Jathanis said:
Snip

Don't get me wrong, I'm damn proud of the 12M points I have in F@H, and came back to test the waters again while helping with the Default push. And I'll be sure to come back if/when the need ever arises again. But for now, I'm SOOOO glad I didn't go spend money on that Socket F rig I was planning last year, and I'll be heading back over to the BOINC fun! Feel free to stop in and say hi - we'd love to have you, even if it is just a temporary break until Vijay & Co. get their heads out of their asses...
Click to expand...

You should buy the Socket F rig for BOINC. Well worth the price for lots of BOINC crunching!!
 
Adak said:
Since several of the posters have taken the position that they are not now, or will not be folding for FAH in the future - wouldn't it be ODD to thank them for folding in the present or the future?

Really? The best you can do is to pick apart some inference in syntax, that was never meant to begin with, and slime Kasson and FAH with it?

Rather pathetic.
Click to expand...



Awe .. I'm so sorry that I made you feel that way.

But I'm glad that I pissed you off. Just wonder how you look at that moment. Must be awesome heh? :D

Few things for you Adak:

-You have you right to express your thought, so do I. Right?
-You like you help PG (for whatever reason), it doesn't mean that I HAVE TO do so.
-You choose to use WORDS fight, I choose to STRIKE. So, you do your fight, I do my strike. You have problem with that?
-Why you got pissed of when I picked on Kasson? :confused:

Regarding what Kasson said. The first line - from what I understand - simply meant:

" Thank you for your donations in the past, if you choose to leave FAH, we don't give a rat shit" :D:D:D
 
Adak, I don't know what your agenda is here. You felt the need as the self-appointed speaker of all BA folders to parse this forum to present it to bruce. Now you are chasing folders from one forum to another trying to moderate and or disparage their posts all over the internet. Let the man speak his mind and vent if needed. We are all big boys here and I think he certainly deserves that.

It seems to me that you are gunning for the new PG PR position - or at least the next FF moderator gone out of control. Don't you have something better to do than bitch about what people say on their own forum?

Go ahead and share your thoughts here, but stop berating others whose views are different than your own. Just skip over the posts that annoy you and move on... like I do with Chimp Challenge postings. ;)

sbinh - Fold on - or crunch on - or turn it off for a while until the drama subsides, it is all good. We'll leave the light on for you.
 
KMac said:
Adak, I don't know what your agenda is here......
Click to expand...

Yep. I am actually beginning to feel highly trolled in this thread.
Self-appointed arrogance does not bode well for accomplishing anything, other than adding to the pissing contest.
 
DooKey said:
You should buy the Socket F rig for BOINC. Well worth the price for lots of BOINC crunching!!
Click to expand...

Well, maybe once these changes are through, a few systems might make it into the FS/FT thread at a price I can handle - the 32 core requirement is set to go into effect right around my tax return time... :cool:
 
KMac said:
Adak, I don't know what your agenda is here. You felt the need as the self-appointed speaker of all BA folders to parse this forum to present it to bruce. Now you are chasing folders from one forum to another trying to moderate and or disparage their posts all over the internet. Let the man speak his mind and vent if needed. We are all big boys here and I think he certainly deserves that.

It seems to me that you are gunning for the new PG PR position - or at least the next FF moderator gone out of control. Don't you have something better to do than bitch about what people say on their own forum?

Go ahead and share your thoughts here, but stop berating others whose views are different than your own. Just skip over the posts that annoy you and move on... like I do with Chimp Challenge postings. ;)

sbinh - Fold on - or crunch on - or turn it off for a while until the drama subsides, it is all good. We'll leave the light on for you.
Click to expand...

I'm not looking for any job position, paid or otherwise. My agenda is to try and keep FAH running at flank speed or better. :D

Regarding what Kasson said. The first line - from what I understand - simply meant:

" Thank you for your donations in the past, if you choose to leave FAH, we don't give a rat shit"
Click to expand...

Since CLEARLY Kasson said nothing about not caring a "rat shit", or anything remotely like it, that's just a cheap blatant lie and a cheap try at sliming Kasson - nothing more.

There are several things about the BA change in threshold thread, that really bother me. See what you think:

1) Several of the most active complainers, don't even HAVE a BA folder. :confused:

2) Several more of the most active complainers, won't even be affected by the change in threshold, should it be implemented. :confused:

There has always been a communication problem with Vijay, made worse because he changes FAH around with lots of new project types, etc. It's a problem, and it's a long-standing irritant, but it's NOT THIS PROBLEM, and should be dealt with on it's own, not lumped into the BA change problem. When you put the problems together, it becomes almost hopeless to solve either one of them.

This "ganging up" on Kasson (who doesn't have the authority to change FAH policy anyway), is not just unseemly, but it substantially "poisons" the FAH project, when new prospects read slimy statements like the above.

Every one's entitled to their opinions, but such obvious ad hominem attacks as the above, begs the question "is that the kind of attack you want to have in your forum?" Foster personal attacks on people who aren't here to defend themselves, for reasons that they're not responsible for, over things that were simply made up?

Does that seem OK to you?
 
Well, this seems refreshing...
VijayPande said:
I'm sorry really sorry about this. What's great to see is how passionate they are about this and how much they care and want to make things better. My group and I are all really energized by that. What's also clear is that many donors here would like to get more feedback and communication. We've been trying to do that starting with the new year, with a lot more blog posts per week than we've ever done. Clearly more would always help.

In terms of what I said about running on Google -- I didn't ever think that people would take that as we don't care about donors or run FAH and I'm sorry if I communicated that poorly and I can see how that sentiment would make donors very upset. Hopefully our current work can demonstrate how much donors matter, i.e. the fact that we're doing that now and still working hard to continue to push FAH (including work on issues that crop up during the only 2 week vacation most of take all year, pushing more interaction through the blog, bringing up new AS infrastructure to help fix GPU AS issues, pushing out a new client, and more to come) shows our continued commitment here.

I am also very worried about how much unhappiness the Big Adv program has caused. Our goal here is to fight disease and do the best science we can. Our style is to push to new and create approaches. That's how we pioneered FAH in the first place, and GPUs, SMP, PS3, BA, etc. All of these are our attempt to push the science as far as we can. There is a critically important human element to all of this and I don't think that's our strength. I think we're best when we're pushing new algorithms and coming up with new scientific ideas.

We haven't made any decisions about BA, but in terms of recognizing my teams strengths and weaknesses, I think managing something as complex as BA in terms of donors needs and expectations isn't something we've done well at all. That makes me worried and disappointed, since the goal here is for all of us to work together to do some great science, not for us to cause grief and anger amongst donors. My current thinking is that we're doing too much and we need to simplify what we do at FAH so we do less better, and then expand from there. We haven't decided what that means, but what is clear is that this sort of unhappiness amongst donors is a very clear sign that we're doing something very wrong and my team needs to regroup and come up with a plan to avoid this in the future.
Click to expand...
 
Vijay,

Get rid of the fools at FF and open your own PG forum modded by PG employees with authority to interact on PG behalf would be a nice start.

Yeah, I'm talking about bruce and 7im. Eliminate those fools.
 
Adak said:
I'm not looking for any job position, paid or otherwise. My agenda is to try and keep FAH running at flank speed or better. :D



Since CLEARLY Kasson said nothing about not caring a "rat shit", or anything remotely like it, that's just a cheap blatant lie and a cheap try at sliming Kasson - nothing more.

There are several things about the BA change in threshold thread, that really bother me. See what you think:

1) Several of the most active complainers, don't even HAVE a BA folder. :confused:

2) Several more of the most active complainers, won't even be affected by the change in threshold, should it be implemented. :confused:
Click to expand...

So are you saying that those who do fold BA and won't be hit by this decision until maybe a year from now have no right to complain. No voice? That's rather arrogant of you.

Are you also saying that those who don't even have a BA folder (and I'm assuming you've either checked the stats or broke into their house and inventoried their equipment) don't have a voice?

How the heck does one even believe that as a donor (volunteer) we give up our voices for the greater good? You have a gift Adak... the ability to try to turn a phrase against a personal opinion and use that as your cudgel. Without communications folks will and do tend to interpret words given a past road map as has been shown previously by FAH. Get the impression yet that others see through this? Your weapon sir has dulled with abuse... I'm awarding you the Book of Words -5 for your efforts. :p
 
Last edited:
I think we could make more progress - understanding the problem and collaborating to find solutions, if we could pull back on the emotions and egos. How can we adequately address issues at Pande Group if we are taking disrespectful tones with each other. Our concerns and discussion have degenerated into personal diatribes against each other and against PG, who incidentally, care about the project as much as we do.

We are engaging the strategy of divide and conquer....against ourselves! It's time to stop that. It serves no purpose other than to feed some kind of spurious psychological urge.


this post not directed against any one person
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top