Per the titan thread... How many are backing down?

Off topic: I will now spend all my folding time trying to figure out how to get a ~825 meg RAM WU. LOL man that's a [H]ard WU. Yea, sign up for the beta group I guess huh.
Click to expand...

Join the beta team and I'll give you a years worth to fold :)

It is expected to see issues in beta testing... and I've posted this elsewhere this evening, but the simple fact of it is, in my 3 years of folding, my two biggest issues were caused by non-beta, non-advanced Tinker cores which are considered the safest of all the core types... until this ram issue, I have had zero issues with a beta core/client/WU that I would call a show stopper... I've lost 10's of thousands of points during beta testing, doesn't bother me in the least... I've found many a bug in WU's, clients and points issues... even these huge RAM WU's didn't affect all my machines, but it did hit the dual ones very hard... if the fix i asked for was out, I wouldn't of seen the issue and if I wasn't running beta I wouldn't of seen the issue either... so not running beta units still wouldn't guarrenty stability going off my past history and it's going to lose a whole lot of test machines if I were to switch flags. It's worked out well in the past being able to pull data from a bunch of various platforms and configs very quickly to see where an issue may lie.

Just more stuff to think about...

-Jim (OC-AMD)
 
Hey you are dead on and I for one salute you!
thewave.gif

You should not be made out to be the whistleblower....this was called before!
Just because you bring the amount of chips to the table that you do you are catching a bad rap!
You have done your share for sure.....and you will always be welcomed back! :cool:

 
Are any Stanford people reading this? If so, could you please chime in.

Also is anyone sending emails to anyone? We should get a handle on what Stanford is planning with the wu sizes and updates to the clients.

Personally I don't like the huge increases in memory for the basic configurations of the client. I'll live with it though.

-MN Scout
 
OC-AMD said:
Join the beta team and I'll give you a years worth to fold :)
Click to expand...
Damn - is that a years worth of YOUR production I'll JOIN:)
Anyways-
OC-AMD I respect your production and dedication to folding but I don't understand your fixation on running beta on a large number of machines,
Stanford has been screwing us cutting edge peeps since day 1.
When genome was running it was like waking up every morning and hitting yourself in the head with a 6X6. Folding is like a 2x4.
Please hang with folding, my children and grandchildren need your contributions.
It's probably too late for me.
 
MN Scout said:
Are any Stanford people reading this? If so, could you please chime in.

Also is anyone sending emails to anyone? We should get a handle on what Stanford is planning with the wu sizes and updates to the clients.

Personally I don't like the huge increases in memory for the basic configurations of the client. I'll live with it though.

-MN Scout
Click to expand...

Stanford is very aware of the issue.......trust me :D What remains to be seen is if they continue to toe the party line or if they do something.....and how they handle it.
 
Stanford has now suspended QMDs until enough people get word on how to use the flags.

-MN Scout

Originally Posted by Vijay Pande
There have been some questions about the use of flags and FAH's stability and I wanted to make an announcement to try to clear things up.

There are two flags in particular which are to be used with caution. The big WU flag gets big WUs, but these big WUs may be poorly suited for older machines. The bigWU flag combined with advanced methods brings big WUs that are more advanced (QMD"s right now).

Gromacs was originally released as an advanced only WU until we could work things out to make it more stable. By having a flag, one would have to opt in and the default (Tinker in that case) would be stable.

We've kept that philosophy throughout FAH. Right now, Gromacs is stable, but QMD is much less so. QMD is also a big WU, so one has to choose both QMD and advanced methods to get it. BigWU + adv gets highly experimental QMD WUs and they may not work well for all. We suggest that one only use both flags if you're absolutely sure this is what you want (if you're not sure what you want, I would suggest that you don't want QMD's).

We should have been more clear about this, but hopefully this post will help. Due to this confusion, I'm going to suspend QMD's until we can be sure that a significant number of people have gotten the word on this.

So, as a summary, advanced methods is just that -- something which may bring more points, but also more trouble. Please consider this tradeoff when you choose settings.


_________________
Professor Vijay S. Pande, PhD
Director, Folding@Home Distributed Computing Project, and
Assistant Professor of Chemistry and of Structural Biology, Stanford University
Click to expand...
 
MN Scout said:
Stanford has now suspended QMDs until enough people get word on how to use the flags.

-MN Scout
Click to expand...

Hehe...old news and not the real issue anyway. This still doesn't fix the client.
 
And the issue with telling people not to run beta clients is just that. If people don't run them, Stanford never finds out about them 'till it's too late and they hit mainstream, and then they lose support. OC-AMD did what he could, and more, and with his huge number of machines he is basically the ultimate beta tester. He's a single person who understands the core and what's happening, and can see it happening. He's one of the people that can catch AND diagnose the issues quickly. I don't have the experience and knowledge of programming and the way the client works that he does, so I don't run beta WU's. But, if Stanford wants a good program, they really do need to keep people like OC-AMD in the game. Not because he does so much work, but because he finds bugs, and is able to tell exactly which cores cause a problem by himself , rather than needing to compile hundreds of reports from hundreds of different people that may be less knowledgable. It sucks losing OC-AMD for the points, and research not being done, but moreso because his skill can advance the client farther, faster, and better than most other places. Beta's just don't work unless you have a lot of PC's running them, and having one person monitoring them all works quite well, because he can notice trends far faster. Losing him because of trivial issues that should be fixed hurts Stanford more than they realize, IMO, because people like him running it on absolutely massive distributions give the program credit. Honestly, I've never heard of people running, say, Seti@Home, on that many machines themselves. He's more than just a team member, he's a figurehead that people trying to recruit more folders can point to and go, "Look, he's running it on a corporate mainframe, on thousands of machines. If he trusts it that much, and has that much faith in it, it shows something about the project, and what we all believe, and KNOW, that it can do."
 
chileman said:
When I borg I don't go with big WUs just to keep them from bitching. So far so good!

Click to expand...

Can you tell me what the best settings are for doing this?(keep them from b*tching I mean)Do you do anything else aside from disabling big WU's?
 
Aratech said:
Can you tell me what the best settings are for doing this?(keep them from b*tching I mean)Do you do anything else aside from disabling big WU's?
Click to expand...

You also don't want to run with the -advmethods switch. This will prevent the beta proteins from being downloaded.

 
marty9876 said:
Per 1. it don't matter as AMD's can't get QMD's anyways currently.
Per 2. Whats the point of AMD to begin with---kidding here :D Run two big packets
Per 3. Don't matter as you need greater than 512 meg ram to get QMD. I'd leave large packets off if used daily. Dedicated folder turn large packets on.
Per 4. Right, should be able to run big packets though just not -adv
5. This get's messy fast. Dual= Generally speaking run one big/-adv and one normal/timeless. HT= just run one big/-adv to begin with and make you life easier.

My thoughts anyways.
Click to expand...

Noted and being implemented.

Points matter, but being able to "use" the borgs matters most of all. If employees can't utilize what the company paid for, then Stanford loses more than just a few QMD WU; they lose all the potential WUs when FAH gets banned from the workplace.

As for "Per 2" up there, my farm is about 6 to 1 in favor of AMD cores. I have a total of four Intels; one P3-866, a 1.6 P4, 2.2 P4 and the 3.0 HT. 7 1/2 Ghz from Satan Clara, and not much for QMD in the main. The other 20+ or so Ghz is from Sunnydale. It'll do... ;)
 
MN Scout said:
Are any Stanford people reading this? If so, could you please chime in.

Also is anyone sending emails to anyone? We should get a handle on what Stanford is planning with the wu sizes and updates to the clients.

Personally I don't like the huge increases in memory for the basic configurations of the client. I'll live with it though.

-MN Scout
Click to expand...

People from Stanford do occasionally drop in as well as the folk from the folding community.

If one looks at the total resources we as folders, and I mean everyone on every team provide, it’s a staggering amount of computing power. It is in fact more computing power then Stanford or any single let alone some combined institutions could possibly ever afford to purchase.

I never asked for a “thanks” or anything else. All I ever asked was good code and some common sense on their part. Neither seems forthcoming.

I have often tried to make the case that Stanford takes us all for granted; yet I continue on with the project because I still believe in the end game.

I still believe in the goal, the cure, or even a new avenue that will lead to some, any, cures.

Dr Pande needs to understand that what he now has at his disposal could stop at anytime. His assumption that all this is limitless and endless is an assumption born of the arrogance one often finds in the academic community.

I too hope they look, and listen and respond. There is a lot at stake here for all of us on many levels.
 
Well 1st VJ has dropped into most other forums, just nor our. Guess he no like us.

Not to burst anybodys bubble, but the [H] has done ~6.23% of the project. To truly understand the scope of this project it mind blowing.

Intersesting stats place- http://www.statsman.info/folding2stats/html/
 
marty9876 said:
Well 1st VJ has dropped into most other forums, just nor our. Guess he no like us.

Not to burst anybodys bubble, but the [H] has done ~6.23% of the project. To truly understand the scope of this project it mind blowing.

Intersesting stats place- http://www.statsman.info/folding2stats/html/
Click to expand...

It’s not that VJ doesn’t like us; his attitude did a major change once “Google” became involved in the project.

Google represents over 50% of the total production and for the most part they don’t have opinions, as such they are no bother.

Those in academia as a rule do not like to be questioned or contradicted. Those of us who are dedicated to the project and have taken a keen interest as well as spent a lot of time money and effort probably ask way too many questions. Worse, we like answers. :rolleyes: ;)
 
BillR said:
Those in academia as a rule do not like to be questioned or contradicted. Those of us who are dedicated to the project and have taken a keen interest as well as spent a lot of time money and effort probably ask way too many questions. Worse, we like answers. :rolleyes: ;)
Click to expand...

That isn't entirely true. I am sort of mostly in academia and dedicated ot the project even though I can't produce as much as I would like (damn Solaris and IRIX clients not being there). Search the official forum for [Spectre]
 
Spectre said:
That isn't entirely true. I am sort of mostly in academia and dedicated ot the project even though I can't produce as much as I would like (damn Solaris and IRIX clients not being there). Search the official forum for [Spectre]
Click to expand...

Spectre, at no point did I ever question anyone’s dedication. Everyone involved for the long term is indeed dedicated.

I do however continue to question Stanford’s assumptive attitude. Perhaps it’s just my conservative side? ;)

 
One thing to VJ and the teams credit is they do interact with the folks processing this program(us in general). I image many other DC programs do not get this kind of first hand responce.

True, OC-AMD is a huge member of the program, but in the grand scheme of things his WU's done are ~<.1 % (? just a guess) of everything overall. Being able to get a fire started with responces upto 3 am in the morning has to say something. Ture, the responces might not be what everybody was looking for, but you have to give Stanford credit for at least reading the requests. I'm sure OC-AMD's beta work and general help in the forums go far beyond any amout of WU he could crunch.
 
Not to burst anybodys bubble, but the [H] has done ~6.23% of the project. To truly understand the scope of this project it mind blowing.
Click to expand...

Thats a tad mis-leading from Statsman... that percentage is out of the top 1000 teams, there are far more then a 1000 teams... same with my stats there, it's a 2.77% of the top 1000 users, not the entire project.
 
Even then, most of the work is done by anonymous/google contributors. Most people running through them don't give feedback, as they probably don't check up on the client, or run it for an extended period of time. People like us, that form teams and have been around for ages, make up the development environment for F@H, and are the people Stanford actually gets responses from, where they can turn around and go "Hey, what were you doing when the problem happened? How often has it happened? What WU's is it happening with? What features would make more people able to fold?". With the google and anonymous contributors, they don't have that interaction. As such, they need us more than the other users, because without us, the anonymous users and google users would never turn in WU, because they'd keep leaking bad beta clients that didn't get caught. It's a case where a vocal minority is more important than a silent majority,
 
This is all i have to say about this.... I think you all know who sung this one..

"Well I won't back down
No I won't back down
You can stand me up at the gates of hell
But I won't back down

No I'll stand my ground, won't be turned around
And I'll keep this world from draggin me down
gonna stand my ground
... and I won't back down

Chorus:
(I won't back down...)
Hey baby, there ain't no easy way out
(and I won't back down...)
hey I will stand my ground
and I won't back down"​


There ain't much else to say about that.
 
BillR said:
Spectre, at no point did I ever question anyone’s dedication. Everyone involved for the long term is indeed dedicated.

I do however continue to question Stanford’s assumptive attitude. Perhaps it’s just my conservative side? ;)

Click to expand...

I know I am pointing out not all of us in academia fall into the same category ;)
 
KodiakStar said:
I say ya'll should stop wasting your cycles posting and Fold [H]arder.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm posting at work so my cycles arent being wasted. ;)

But to answer the question....

I'm NOT backing down.

[Edit]Before you ask why I am not folding at work....
I have tried to borg my workstation but they have the registry locked somehow.
 
Aratech said:
Before you ask why I am not folding at work....
I have tried to borg my workstation but they have the registry locked somehow.
Click to expand...

Use the -local switch in the Folding client after copying it from a home PC with a diff machineID. It'll use only the info found in the client.cfg file, and not check the registry, IIRC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top