I think Crunch3r is right about this. Going to the "2 result" quorum was the "developer's" way of optimizing. Obviously using a "3 result" quorum would take the project about 6 more months to finish. Unfortunately, they didn't anticipate the potential problem of "two bad results" matching up - although they certainly should have, given the wide usage of Akos' apps on S4. So now it's back to the drawing boards.
Hm, but maybe with no modified versions around the chance of 2 bad, but identical results is very very low.. when there is an error its not the same then someone else... hm.. Thats a good point, dont know if its better than optimizing the application but.. hm makes at least some sense... hard to say.... so good night :)
And what I said at the time to you on the forums, was without thinking about that tag on my shoulder. ;-)
My late apologies. Well, as a(n) (ex) mod then. :)
No need to apologiese. I finnished with all that about a month ago and not takeing any care of S@H any more ( but that doesn't belong here).
Quote:
Just courious that no one wondered that one guy with less than 1k credit is now a mod over there...
last I heard it's someone with a lot more to his regular name (and farm), but since the forums do not allow anyone to post with zero credits, he had to crunch.
Hmm... still quite confusing to allow one who's not known to anyone to be a mod ... but hey that's S@H ...
As long as both std. app and the optimized app. produces exactly the SAME results, i don't see any reason to discard the opt. app.
Both are producing the SAME result as i can see it now and why should i use a slower app that does the same sience in 30% more time ?
Just because the numbers are the same doesn't mean the results are the same. If you've ever attempted to be published in a scientific journal, you'd know the QA rigors that the judges will put you through. With a major scientific discovery, you can expect the scrutiny to be many times greater. You can't attempt to publish a gravity wave discovery when some of the results were calculated by an unofficial program, regardless of the similarity of the results. It may seem stupid to you, but that's how it is. If you don't like it and think you're smart and cool for refusing to comply with the wishes of the project owners, you need to realize that you're not; you're only wasting their time.
Lets face it there arent many that are gonna show gravity waves. Im sure it will be checked, double checked and triple checked for good measure anyway. Whats the problem?
Lets face it there arent many that are gonna show gravity waves. Im sure it will be checked, double checked and triple checked for good measure anyway. Whats the problem?
Do you think this project costs no money to run? Do you think Bruce, Bernd, et al. pay out-of-pocket for this?
Funding proposals typically require progress reports and updates to the agency or agencies granting the money. There may be higher powers that dictate the QA.
The developers are not doing this on a whim; they have reasons. If you can't accept the science or respect what the official leaders are doing, that's fine, but don't throw stones and act like you have some insider knowledge about their intent.
Funding proposals typically require progress reports and updates to the agency or agencies granting the money. There may be higher powers that dictate the QA.
The developers are not doing this on a whim; they have reasons. If you can't accept the science or respect what the official leaders are doing, that's fine, but don't throw stones and act like you have some insider knowledge about their intent.
Again... this is not about the costs... any idea of what akosf's s4 apps saved money to the project due to reduced run times and speed up due to faster processing... completing the S4 task in way shorter time than it was supposed to ???
Same applies to the latested patched. app.. AGAIN the results are the SAME compared to the standard app.. although it takes 30 to 40 % less processing time. Thats a FACT why do you keep ignoring that ?
Crunch3r, there is a 3rd party here to take into account: the actual scientists that look into the data crunched by the people.
If these scientists want an approved application only to crunch their data, then an extra optimized app isn't the way to go. The stock Einstein_S5R1 4.02 application (for Windows) is the approved application.
With the help of the patch it may go quicker, but as long as the patch isn't approved, the data, whether it's good or bad, will be rejected by the scientists.
And so the project's time only takes longer, because all the results done with the patch will have to be re-sent out again to people who crunch it with the stock application.
Crunch3r, there is a 3rd party here to take into account: the actual scientists that look into the data crunched by the people.
If these scientists want an approved application only to crunch their data, then an extra optimized app isn't the way to go. The stock Einstein_S5R1 4.02 application (for Windows) is the approved application.
With the help of the patch it may go quicker, but as long as the patch isn't approved, the data, whether it's good or bad, will be rejected by the scientists.
And so the project's time only takes longer, because all the results done with the patch will have to be re-sent out again to people who crunch it with the stock application.
Jord,
The results are absolutely the SAME... wether you use the stock app. or the patched one. So what's the reason to not using it ?
Even the some declare that they only use results by the stock app... it'll be allways the same result..
Let me put it this way:
One (let me call him/her ---> A) needs to claim that the earth is not a disc in about a year... (great she/he did figured it out some how...)
B on the otherside needs to take that point in less than 1/3 of a year an d still she/he can prove earth is not a disc in far less the time ...
So what's wrong here ??? B knows the real truth faster than A.... same applies to the patched apps.
If the scientists at different universities say that the data comes from a source they didn't approve of, then they will not use it. There is no way to fight that.
So why not just wait it out until the new patch is approved? What is wrong with that?
RE: I think Crunch3r is
)
Hm, but maybe with no modified versions around the chance of 2 bad, but identical results is very very low.. when there is an error its not the same then someone else... hm.. Thats a good point, dont know if its better than optimizing the application but.. hm makes at least some sense... hard to say.... so good night :)
RE: RE: And what I said
)
Hmm... still quite confusing to allow one who's not known to anyone to be a mod ... but hey that's S@H ...
RE: RE: As long as both
)
RE: Lets face it there
)
Do you think this project costs no money to run? Do you think Bruce, Bernd, et al. pay out-of-pocket for this?
Funding proposals typically require progress reports and updates to the agency or agencies granting the money. There may be higher powers that dictate the QA.
The developers are not doing this on a whim; they have reasons. If you can't accept the science or respect what the official leaders are doing, that's fine, but don't throw stones and act like you have some insider knowledge about their intent.
RE: Funding proposals
)
Again... this is not about the costs... any idea of what akosf's s4 apps saved money to the project due to reduced run times and speed up due to faster processing... completing the S4 task in way shorter time than it was supposed to ???
Same applies to the latested patched. app.. AGAIN the results are the SAME compared to the standard app.. although it takes 30 to 40 % less processing time. Thats a FACT why do you keep ignoring that ?
Crunch3r, there is a 3rd
)
Crunch3r, there is a 3rd party here to take into account: the actual scientists that look into the data crunched by the people.
If these scientists want an approved application only to crunch their data, then an extra optimized app isn't the way to go. The stock Einstein_S5R1 4.02 application (for Windows) is the approved application.
With the help of the patch it may go quicker, but as long as the patch isn't approved, the data, whether it's good or bad, will be rejected by the scientists.
And so the project's time only takes longer, because all the results done with the patch will have to be re-sent out again to people who crunch it with the stock application.
RE: Crunch3r, there is a
)
Jord,
The results are absolutely the SAME... wether you use the stock app. or the patched one. So what's the reason to not using it ?
Even the some declare that they only use results by the stock app... it'll be allways the same result..
Let me put it this way:
One (let me call him/her ---> A) needs to claim that the earth is not a disc in about a year... (great she/he did figured it out some how...)
B on the otherside needs to take that point in less than 1/3 of a year an d still she/he can prove earth is not a disc in far less the time ...
So what's wrong here ???
B knows the real truth faster than A.... same applies to the patched apps.
What's the problem ? Get the facts !!!
Bert: I need help to paint my
)
Bert: I need help to paint my house
Ernie: I'll help. I've got some pink paint we can use.
Bert: I don't want a pink house! I bought some blue paint.
Ernie: But I want to paint it pink.
Bert: I don't want it pink! I want it blue. I have the paint. It's just the colour I want. Will you help me put it on?
Ernie: Sure I'll help, but I'm going to paint it pink.
Bert: Look, if you won't help me paint it blue, I don't want you to help me at all.
Ernie: Too late, Bert. You asked me to help, so I'm goint to paint your house pink, whether you like it or not!
Dead men don't get the baby washed. HTH
RE: So what's the reason to
)
No need to yell at me. ;-)
If the scientists at different universities say that the data comes from a source they didn't approve of, then they will not use it. There is no way to fight that.
So why not just wait it out until the new patch is approved? What is wrong with that?
RE: Bert: I need help to
)
And whos app is ERNIE ? Stock or optimized and which one is Bert ?
Depends on your point of view...
Still can't decide if i agree with you or not ;)