Optomized S5 SSE3

DanNeely
DanNeely
Joined: 4 Sep 05
Posts: 1364
Credit: 3562358667
RAC: 0

RE: So is someone going to

Message 39480 in response to message 39478

Quote:

So is someone going to remove that 'sticky' thread about the patches and new .dat files? seems bad idea to have them up with maybe some still working download links. Right now all its got is Akosf asking people not to use.

[EDIT] just realised probly best to leave it up so everyone can read that 'DONT USE' so ignore me.

I have to disagree. Unsticky and lock all the current dev threads with a DON"T USE post, and then sticky and lock a seperate DON'T USE thread.

Digger
Digger
Joined: 24 Mar 05
Posts: 84
Credit: 27421
RAC: 0

RE: Dig...I agree with your

Message 39481 in response to message 39479


Quote:
Dig...I agree with your assessments...and again AKOS, we thank you for making ths project interesting!!


Thanks Stan! Let me buy you a couple shots of Jack Daniels over at the Einstein Cafe :-)

Dig

Pepperammi
Pepperammi
Joined: 20 Feb 05
Posts: 131
Credit: 437943
RAC: 0

RE: RE: So is someone

Message 39482 in response to message 39480

Quote:
Quote:

So is someone going to remove that 'sticky' thread about the patches and new .dat files? seems bad idea to have them up with maybe some still working download links. Right now all its got is Akosf asking people not to use.

[EDIT] just realised probly best to leave it up so everyone can read that 'DONT USE' so ignore me.

I have to disagree. Unsticky and lock all the current dev threads with a DON"T USE post, and then sticky and lock a seperate DON'T USE thread.


Only important thing would be to ensure noone unknowingly tries to use the patches. remove all the patches and patched apps from the links (people who provided links responsibility) or maybe mods remove the posts with the links? and maybe as you say locking/closing the thread with DONT USE message.

Michael Roberts
Michael Roberts
Joined: 17 Mar 05
Posts: 4
Credit: 396395
RAC: 0

Ha! Just when I thought it

Ha! Just when I thought it was safe to go to bed...
I have reverted to the standard application and posted a notification on our team forum.

I recommend a forced update of the application (same code, new version number) as the best way to make the world formally correct again.

Many thanks to Akos and the project team for doing as much as was possible so far, and I hope you will be able to find a way to make further updates in a controlled manner.

Barrie
Barrie
Joined: 23 Mar 05
Posts: 219
Credit: 21449106
RAC: 0

Would relaunching the

Would relaunching the official app with a new version no. higher than 4.10 purge the world of unofficial apps? Or would that app_info.xml malarkey prevent it?

Dead men don't get the baby washed. HTH

Matt3223
Matt3223
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 54
Credit: 448298
RAC: 0

unexpected news for sure!!!!

unexpected news for sure!!!! Not sure where all the anger and animosity is coming from........disappointment sure.......but I don't think any of the Einstein team did anything malicious, or hid things from us......

They seemed fully on board too for the most part, and then came to the realization that unofficial apps may taint the legitimacy of the results.....I'm sure they are as shocked as we are...

we've learned a lesson here.......perhaps we were a bit hasty, but we must go back to the official apps.......regardless of what we think, Einstein team thinks, or how valid the opt. apps really are.......it's all a waste of time if the outside scientific community will question the results by using an unofficial app..

doesn't matter how fast we crunch them, if they won't hold under peer review.

we have to produce results that can withstand outside scrutiny. The Einstein team seems to have realized that this won't hold true if the results aren't from official apps.

Back to the official!

I'm stayin'!!!!!!

I wish everyone else would too! After all, we are here to do some science. And we want that science to be deemed credible by others.

[edited bored --> board] I'm pretty postive they aren't bored!!!

Digger
Digger
Joined: 24 Mar 05
Posts: 84
Credit: 27421
RAC: 0

RE: I'm stayin'!!!!!! I

Message 39486 in response to message 39485


Quote:
I'm stayin'!!!!!! I wish everyone else would too! After all, we are here to do some science. And we want that science to be deemed credible by others...


I couldn't agree more, Matt.

I myself and a few others are having a few drinks tonight in honor of Einstein. Come join us in the Einstein Cafe. The first round of drinks is on me!

:-)

Dig

Lisandro Firman
Lisandro Firman
Joined: 17 May 06
Posts: 22
Credit: 49004
RAC: 0

I will suspend EH until I

I will suspend EH until I hear an official explanation. I don't see why unnofficial applications can invalidate the results. If EH detects something, it will be rerun and verified in stock application, many times for sure. Negative results (no detection) means nothing to the project. In the worst case, a posible positive deteccion in a WU may be spoilled if two bad application run it and don´t detect anyting, but the whole project is about positive results, and there is not way that unnoficial application are going to invalidate them...

Matt3223
Matt3223
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 54
Credit: 448298
RAC: 0

how about setting no new

how about setting no new tasks, aborting units, reporting that fact back by updating, then simply detaching from the project, and then reattaching to the project to start anew?

Matt3223
Matt3223
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 54
Credit: 448298
RAC: 0

Lisandro and others with

Lisandro and others with similar thinking have a point. would like to see an official reply to that viewpoint.

I guess I'm still going back official in the meantime to watch and see what settles.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.