In Bruce's electricity saving terms: $10K per day in electicity -> some number crunching -> at least 20% electricity savings with optimized apps -> at least $2k per day in savings foregone without current level of optimization -> somewhere between $750K and $1M in energy wasted and paid for by all crunchers over the course of S5.
You should know that always the base researches need the most money and they produces the worst efficiency. But they gives the best things for the mankind.
Thank you for blaming Akos. Akos did a very good job for S4 instead of the personal which was paid for. Akos should be an "official" member of the team.
I think everybody saved a lot of energy using akos optimations on S4.
Dots
I think you misunderstood me. I'm not blaming Akos at all, and have nothing but admiration for his skill in being able to reverse engineer and optimize S4 without the benefit of the source code.
BTW, He *is* a member of the EAH team, which is why I don't understand this "mini flap".
It's not like the enhancements aren't going to work their way into the official app at some point down the road.
In Bruce's electricity saving terms: $10K per day in electicity -> some number crunching -> at least 20% electricity savings with optimized apps -> at least $2k per day in savings foregone without current level of optimization -> somewhere between $750K and $1M in energy wasted and paid for by all crunchers over the course of S5.
You should know that always the base researches need the most money and they produces the orst efficiency. But they gives the best things for the mankind.
Very well said!
But there are other base research projects.
I guess all we want is your excellent work beeing part of the offical app.
In Bruce's electricity saving terms: $10K per day in electicity -> some number crunching -> at least 20% electricity savings with optimized apps -> at least $2k per day in savings foregone without current level of optimization -> somewhere between $750K and $1M in energy wasted and paid for by all crunchers over the course of S5.
You should know that always the base researches need the most money and they produces the orst efficiency. But they gives the best things for the mankind.
Indeed, as well as "no good deed goes unpunished"... :-)
Was there ever any intention that version 4.10 would be subject to more lax validation? I did not believe this, but some did.
There wasn't. Bernd told me than the S4 and S5 validators are the same. There aren't changes.
Quote:
Was S5T0713 functionally the same as S5T0712? Some people think it was, and it produced a 0712 message. There is plenty of evidence it was not the same. Please clarify, before I submit myself as a voluntary mental patient!
S5T0713 produced wrong text output. S5T0713 had some improvement, perpahs its results were wrong. It was a test patch of some new changes.
However the knowledge it a faster application does not give to be used those may although it Validated WUs produced disturbs uncommonly. Gravity is no matter to me, I understands anyway nothing about it.
All this excites me here totally.
Was there ever any intention that version 4.10 would be subject to more lax validation? I did not believe this, but some did.
There wasn't. Bernd told me than the S4 and S5 validators are the same. There aren't changes.
Quote:
Was S5T0713 functionally the same as S5T0712? Some people think it was, and it produced a 0712 message. There is plenty of evidence it was not the same. Please clarify, before I submit myself as a voluntary mental patient!
S5T0713 produced wrong text output. S5T0713 had some improvement, perpahs its results were wrong. It was a test patch of some new changes.
Why did Bernd not tell you this instead of asking for a version number change?
They are confused. They would like to the best for the science, and the good and reliable results are the first. Version number changing was a temporary idea.
RE: In Bruce's electricity
)
You should know that always the base researches need the most money and they produces the worst efficiency. But they gives the best things for the mankind.
RE: The problem is not the
)
Hi akosf!
Are the opt. S4 clients official ?
RE: Thank you for blaming
)
I think you misunderstood me. I'm not blaming Akos at all, and have nothing but admiration for his skill in being able to reverse engineer and optimize S4 without the benefit of the source code.
BTW, He *is* a member of the EAH team, which is why I don't understand this "mini flap".
It's not like the enhancements aren't going to work their way into the official app at some point down the road.
Alinator
RE: RE: In Bruce's
)
Very well said!
But there are other base research projects.
I guess all we want is your excellent work beeing part of the offical app.
cu,
michael
RE: RE: In Bruce's
)
Indeed, as well as "no good deed goes unpunished"... :-)
Alinator
RE: Was there ever any
)
There wasn't. Bernd told me than the S4 and S5 validators are the same. There aren't changes.
S5T0713 produced wrong text output. S5T0713 had some improvement, perpahs its results were wrong. It was a test patch of some new changes.
However the knowledge it a
)
However the knowledge it a faster application does not give to be used those may although it Validated WUs produced disturbs uncommonly.
Gravity is no matter to me, I understands anyway nothing about it.
All this excites me here totally.
Athlon
Stay tuned and keep crunching
RE: RE: Was there ever
)
Akos, thank you very, very much!
Dead men don't get the baby washed. HTH
RE: RE: Where is the
)
Which as many it means that it is more formally and no material error. Formal errors are healed by declaration.
BTW: I think, you are here the lattest, which must apologize.
RE: Why did Bernd not tell
)
They are confused. They would like to the best for the science, and the good and reliable results are the first. Version number changing was a temporary idea.