 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
At the Forefront: New Directions on Cancer and HIV
http://www.scripps.edu/philanthropy/forefront/2009_10.html?tr=y&auid=5454050
http://www.scripps.edu/philanthropy/landing/newsletter/2009_10_focuson.html?origin=0910atf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I tried it on a workplace laptop, once which I have to put into standby mode
multiple times a day. I found that a WCG session was just outright dead when I
re-opened the laptop. I couldn't get it to resume, I think I had to outright
cancel the session. Eventually I gave up. This was about 2 years ago. Any
ideas?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
gregjohn wrote:
> I tried it on a workplace laptop, once which I have to put into standby mode
> multiple times a day. I found that a WCG session was just outright dead when I
> re-opened the laptop. I couldn't get it to resume, I think I had to outright
> cancel the session. Eventually I gave up. This was about 2 years ago. Any
> ideas?
2 Years ago WCG used another client called 'United Devices' now use
BOINC, it is much better and it has more configuration possibilities
when you're installing it, you can even run in on the background as a
service. The WCG have now a forum that has a support section with many
useful threads and active moderators and other volunteer users that
will help you within a few hours of posting. Also now we have badges,
given according to the CPU/GPU time you have donated to research, just
make sure you login with your old account info.
You can download it at WCG (www.worldcommunitygrid.org) or at Berkeley
University (boinc.berkeley.edu).
I recommend you to give it another try, by default you'll only be
donating 60% of every CPU core (I don't know the percentage for GPUs)
you can change this later if you want, you have full control over that
and other features, I personally set it at 99% to assure responsivity,
if you have a Quad Core you can set it at 100%.
Good luck and thank you for caring and doing something about it.
Regards.
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?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote in message
news:4af9ef98@news.povray.org...
> 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?"
What do you mean who benefits? All those poor drug companies who cannot make
ends meet to invest on computer hardware benefit. Computer hardware
manufacturers, power companies, tenure track scientists benefit. Isn't that
enough to make you (and your computer) feel warm and fuzzy inside?
I guess you could say that I am past the age of blissful idealism.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/10/09 19:43, somebody wrote:
>> What I have trouble with is the question, "who benefits?"
>
> What do you mean who benefits? All those poor drug companies who cannot make
> ends meet to invest on computer hardware benefit. Computer hardware
> manufacturers, power companies, tenure track scientists benefit. Isn't that
> enough to make you (and your computer) feel warm and fuzzy inside?
Actually, his concerns are warranted. I think his main concern is: Will
any results be made available for free (both in terms of price and in
terms of restrictions)? If not, he doesn't wish to contribute.
I'd volunteer for a project only if any of the following hold:
1. I benefit directly.
2. Others benefit but don't prevent yet others from benefit.
Most tenure track professors (and the ones who already have tenure)
publish in "closed" journals - so almost everyone on this planet won't
have access to their findings unless they pay a (hefty) fee.
If a pharmaceutical company makes a better drug using this data, but
does not allow the actual findings of this collaboration that allowed
for that drug to be made public, why should I contribute to it? It may
well become a tool to deprive people of medication.
(I haven't actually looked at the site myself to see if these questions
are answered - and I vaguely recall you posted something like this a
while ago and it probably was addressed then).
--
Q: What do you call a half-dozen Indians with Asian flu?
A: Six sick Sikhs (sic).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> 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. 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.
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".
Anyways, the resulting database with the names of the proteins and the
results of the folding will be public and free, it is already for what
can be considered usuful. "World Community Grid has a network of
dedicated partners, each bringing their special expertise and contribution."
Is all there you just want me to convince you of joining with a long and
detailed explanation, well I won't if you are an adult and have a
conscience you would want at least know about it and get the information
on your own.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> I guess you could say that I am past the age of blissful idealism.
To think in this selfish and pessimistic way I'd say you have lost a lot
more than the blissful idealism.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 11/10/09 19:43, somebody wrote:
> 1. I benefit directly.
> 2. Others benefit but don't prevent yet others from benefit.
>
> Most tenure track professors (and the ones who already have tenure)
> publish in "closed" journals - so almost everyone on this planet won't
> have access to their findings unless they pay a (hefty) fee.
>
> If a pharmaceutical company makes a better drug using this data, but
> does not allow the actual findings of this collaboration that allowed
> for that drug to be made public, why should I contribute to it? It may
> well become a tool to deprive people of medication.
>
> (I haven't actually looked at the site myself to see if these
> questions are answered - and I vaguely recall you posted something like
> this a while ago and it probably was addressed then).
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'.
IBM is giving all, the website, support, the equipment, the software
(for the projects to run on BOINC), the administration, everything, so
you can read more WHY at IBM's site.
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.
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,
there, you can get a sea of info about WCG. Now you can read it in
different languages.
Check YouTube, example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyJ1JaIIhbU,
there are many videos made by people talking about WHY they're doing it.
Computers are a wonderful tool, can calculate and do a lot of
interesting stuff but for the first time we, as a World, are making them
work to accelerate dramatically health research for our benefit and of
course share the knowledge among us through the Internet. If you think
about it, the Humanity greatest inventions, computers and the Internet,
working finally as 1 developing a huge potential for a greater good:
save Humanity from diseases that could wipe us if they get out of
control, finally we're making as much as we can, with our brains and
hearts, to save ourselves. And the beautiful part is that everyone can
help as a scientist without having to be one.
http://boincstats.com/
Cheers.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> somebody wrote:
> > I guess you could say that I am past the age of blissful idealism.
>
> To think in this selfish and pessimistic way I'd say you have lost a lot
> more than the blissful idealism.
That's why I'm not an atheist: they are cranky, bored, bickering people filling
in their spiritual needs with lots of empty argumentations and complaints in web
forums. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> 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.
> 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".
> Anyways, the resulting database with the names of the proteins and the
> results of the folding will be public and free, it is already for what
> can be considered usuful. "World Community Grid has a network of
> dedicated partners, each bringing their special expertise and contribution."
> Is all there you just want me to convince you of joining with a long and
> detailed explanation, well I won't if you are an adult and have a
> conscience you would want at least know about it and get the information
> on your own.
Your answer would have been much better if you had written only that
third paragraph and left the others out. Would it have been so difficult
to do so?
If you want people to help, you use something called diplomacy. You answer
their questions and concerns in a respectful and understanding way. You don't
start to argue nor question their motives.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> I'd rather base my opinion on explicit statements by the parties
> involved, and not on "what makes sense".
And I'd rather ask questions to the parties involved, and not Saul ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> 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?"
But Saul is not officially "representing" WCG. Your analogy breaks right
there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> 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.
He's not an IBM employee, to know everything about it. Maybe he *doesn't*
know the answers to your questions, he's just less paranoid than you are so
he uses it anyway.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> 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.
Well, I wasn't referring to this particular or any other website, I mean
in real life where you can see people say & act over time, I meant that
gives away a persons true self, you can't be a hypocrite all your life
without at least someone noticing it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> You answer
> their questions and concerns in a respectful and understanding way. You don't
> start to argue nor question their motives.
But... but... but... this is the *internet*!
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:14:37 -0500, Warp wrote:
> If you want people to help, you use something called diplomacy. You
> answer
> their questions and concerns in a respectful and understanding way. You
> don't start to argue nor question their motives
Well said, Warp.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez schrieb:
> He's not an IBM employee, to know everything about it. Maybe he *doesn't*
> know the answers to your questions, he's just less paranoid than you are so
> he uses it anyway.
Then it would be easy (and also more helpful and, as Jim points out,
less deterring) to answer "I don't know anything about that, but I
personally am convinced that the project is ok" if he intends to promote
the project, or alternatively not answer at all if he doesn't bother.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/11/09 12:30, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> But Saul is not officially "representing" WCG. Your analogy breaks right
> there.
And so all he has to say is "I don't know."
Heck, I'd accept that even in the case I provided. I wouldn't mind a
relief agency representative saying that - at least he's being honest.
--
Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/11/09 12:29, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> I'd rather base my opinion on explicit statements by the parties
>> involved, and not on "what makes sense".
>
> And I'd rather ask questions to the parties involved, and not Saul ;)
And I'd accept Saul saying, "That's a good question. I really don't
know - probably somewhere on the site".
--
Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
news:web.4afa3b1c1e654f9b65e4856b0@news.povray.org...
> Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > somebody wrote:
> > > I guess you could say that I am past the age of blissful idealism.
> > To think in this selfish and pessimistic way I'd say you have lost a lot
> > more than the blissful idealism.
> That's why I'm not an atheist: they are cranky, bored, bickering people
filling
> in their spiritual needs with lots of empty argumentations and complaints
in web
> forums. ;)
Wish I could pick and chose my beliefs.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Your answer would have been much better if you had written only that
> third paragraph and left the others out. Would it have been so difficult
> to do so?
It was at the time for the reasons I explained in the other posts in
this thread: emotional attachment, confusion over "paranoid behavior", etc.
> If you want people to help, you use something called diplomacy. You answer
> their questions and concerns in a respectful and understanding way. You don't
> start to argue nor question their motives.
I'll try it Warp, thanks.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
