 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:21:46 -0400, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Having a AIDS vaccine would be quite direct benefit IMO. Protein folding
> research is key to many important diseases including Cancer. All
> projects are different approaches to protein folding in general,
> including the 'Clean Energy Project'.
Yes, and as was pointed out the last time you brought this up, if the use
of my computer (or other's computers) results in a PATENTED technology
that RESTRICTS the availability of the results of the computations, then
the use of the computing resources used to generate that is not something
that many people are willing to provide for NO COST.
So the question is legitimate, and getting YOUR back up when people ask
these questions will have the same result this time as it did last time.
You brought this up before and got yourself wound up when people asked
questions like this before. Why are you expecting a different response
this time?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga schrieb:
>
> Having a AIDS vaccine would be quite direct benefit IMO. Protein folding
> research is key to many important diseases including Cancer. All
> projects are different approaches to protein folding in general,
> including the 'Clean Energy Project'.
There is a problem here:
Me donating computer processing time will /not/ just miraculously cure
my neighbor of cancer.
There are middle men involved to catalyze my computing power into saving
my neighbor's life. Who are they? What is their agenda? What
constraints are imposed to them?
If all the change this project brings to the world of pharmaceutical
business is to offload the IT costs onto naive private PC owners, then
it wouldn't do any good.
> The World Community Grid has more than 400 Partners world wide each
> helping in some special way to the WCG, you think that IBM and all these
> Partners wanna make something dumb and screw everyone over? by making
> all private when the research was public? I certainly think not.
You don't /think/ so - but are there any explicit statements about these
matters?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga schrieb:
>>> You can download it at WCG (www.worldcommunitygrid.org) or at
>>> Berkeley University (boinc.berkeley.edu).
>>
>> What I have trouble with is the question, "who benefits?" - I don't
>> see this explicitly answered at a prominent place, which to me raises
>> the question why that is so.
>>
>> Who qualifies to use the WCG? Who decides who qualifies? Are the
>> scientific results published without a fee, or will I have to pay to
>> see the research results my computer has helped generating?
>
> You have trouble with everything I write, you always try to polemicize
> everything I post.
Um... could it be that /you/ are having a problem here?
All I did was point out that I, personally, have unanswered questions
regarding this thing that I'm uneasy about, which I raised here in hopes
that you - as a person who seems so enthusiastic about the project that
I had expected you to be well-informed - might be able to answer them,
or give me some useful pointers.
> If you're so interested in this why don't you do what
> some have done here and go to the site and find out.
If you're so upset about me raising this question, then why don't you
just tell what you know?
Normally I know this type of reaction only from people who feel their
firm beliefs endangered by the mere presence of a question.
> You can't find out? Are you a noob web surfer? Learn to dig in the sites
> a little, that's the way the WWW is for now, you have to do a little
> "homework" to get your "candy".
Do you really want to know, or do you just want to insult me?
As a matter of fact, I did browse their web pages, and found that they
did not really go out of their way to answer the question I raised,
despite my expectation that they'd pride themselves with the answer if
it would be to my liking.
Thus, I came quickly to the conclusion that it would probably be a waste
of time to research any further on my own (especially since I got the
impression that this information was deliberately not made public,
implying that (a) it would cost a lot of time to find, and (b) would
lead me to the conclusion that the time was wasted), and that I'd
instead raise the question to someone who is all enthusiastic about the
project, and might therefore possibly (a) be able to answer the question
in no time flat, and (b) be motivated to do so.
Again, I find you just as reluctant to give an answer, and I wonder why:
Is it a bad one?
This all just convinces me that it was the right decision to not invest
much time into it. Thanks for your patience.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well I expected that you actually be less of a paranoid and make your
own conclusions from reading about what the WCG is on their web site,
YouTube (what people say about it) or Google it if you must, but I think
I expected too much.
As I wrote, the database will bee open & free but any drug/treatment
will have to be sold because nobody is gonna give money to the
researchers just because they do a good thing for Humanity, they have to
sell a product to be able to brig food to their families as everybody
does, so maybe they'll have to make some kind of patent about it but
anyway the resulting drug/treatment will cost much less that if they had
to do all the effort on their own.
One more time this is Humanity helping Humanity under legal rules,
nobody is cheating here. But there are people that sees a hoax in
everything because that's the way they see the world of have had bad
experiences or their environment is that way, but this effort is as
innocent as it can be, 400,000+ people worldwide think so and we are
betting on it. Even scientist sometimes post on the WCG Forum, for
example I recently read a post from a scientist at Scripps Institute
(FightAIDS@Home, maker of Autodock used in FightAIDS@Home and other WCG
projects too) and it was reassuring to see how they're so exited and
motivated about the FightAIDS@Home and WCG in general but if you don't
calm down you'll always have a pretext to see bad intention were there
isn't one and avoid doing good. At some point in life you have to bet on
something and risk trusting; you don't have to be successful on it all
the time, you think and act intelligently and expect the best, believe
in something and do your best effort to achieve it like anything in
life, sometimes you win sometimes you loose, but that's life.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yeah, Ive notice that, they're generally not in good mood but they need
the security of materialism, so respect that, they have their peace we
have our own and that's about enjoying life and be a good person.
Besides I have seen religious persons behave like they had just come out
of hell, so religion/spirituality is not guarantee of any kind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Judge by their hearts (words & actions), this will tell you the quality
of person they're regardless of their beliefs.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/10/09 21:21, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Having a AIDS vaccine would be quite direct benefit IMO. Protein folding
Not unless the company charges a ridiculously high price and refuses to
publicize key items that make it work.
Had they not been allowed to do so by the TOS in the project, then more
companies would be allowed to manufacture it. That would be a case where
such a project would hurt the TOS.
> The World Community Grid has more than 400 Partners world wide each
> helping in some special way to the WCG, you think that IBM and all these
> Partners wanna make something dumb and screw everyone over? by making
> all private when the research was public? I certainly think not.
I'd rather base my opinion on explicit statements by the parties
involved, and not on "what makes sense".
> Check the site it a grid for the good of Humanity, is all that it is, it
> explains nicely everything you want to know and then there is a Forum,
OK - As I said, I didn't go to the site. I was merely pointing out that
the _concern_ is valid.
--
Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/10/09 20:17, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> You have trouble with everything I write, you always try to polemicize
> everything I post. If you're so interested in this why don't you do what
> some have done here and go to the site and find out.
He was merely asking a question.
As Jim pointed out, and as it came up the last time you posted here
with this: What's the point of going to a forum, posting a link, asking
people to contribute, and then getting upset when people have questions?
I'm sure it would have taken a lot less effort to simply go to the
site, find the relevant text, and post it here (with the URL). Rather
than try to enlighten, you're inclined more to argue and be paranoid
about people's motives.
Imagine I'm representing a relief agency and have a physical booth in
some community event. I'm asking for donations. If people came to me and
asked for details on how the money will be spent (e.g. on what projects,
how much does the agency use for salaries, etc), would it help for me to
say "Just go to the Web site. We're backed by the State Department, etc.
Why do you doubt us with such backing?"
--
Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:01:19 -0400, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Well I expected that you actually be less of a paranoid and make your
> own conclusions from reading about what the WCG is on their web site,
> YouTube (what people say about it) or Google it if you must, but I think
> I expected too much.
As Neeum posted earlier (and I posted again), when you want to share
something, when people have questions (since you seem to be "in the
know"), berating people you're trying to encourage to help out when they
ask questions really doesn't provide any encouragement.
When people ask questions, just answer them, don't say things like "well,
do your own homework! I got you started, and I think this is really
cool, but do your own f-ing homework for chrissakes!!!!!!" - that's how
you're coming across.
If you want to share something you think is cool, great - if people have
quesitons, don't punch them in the face and expect them to be
enthusiastic about the project.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:37:34 -0400, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Judge by their hearts (words & actions), this will tell you the quality
> of person they're regardless of their beliefs.
Words are pretty meaningless for judging someone's character. You can't
tell the quality of a person from what they (or someone else) posts about
them on a website.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
