Martin 53N 1W wrote:

Eric wrote:

Martin 53N 1W wrote:

[...]

Boinc is still new and is still getting new functionality added. Seti
classic is now very old and staid and long-in-the-tooth and can't do any
other analysis other than only what it is already doing.

Nope, not so. If there are new things to examine then the current Seti
Classic could easily be updated to add those checks/tests/routines to the
analysis.

Sorry, not so. One of the important ideas behind Boinc is that updates
for making new science are made very easy for the developers, and
automatic (easier still!) for the users.

how does boink make it easy for developers? The program that does the actual
processing is now more complex. Updating the seti program (for example) to
add new science tests is no more easy under boink than under classic and in
fact its probably more difficult as now developers have to not only develop
the science code but also keep up with changes in boink

In the not too distant past, each 'update' of s@h classic has caused
problems and frustrations for all.

how so? all you had to do was download the new version - whats so difficult
with that?

Nothing in the search for ET requires boink (vs Seti Classic).
Its poorly designed software and the proof is right in front of everyone:
Is it running anywhere's near normal? nope. Has it always had problems?
yep, right from the git-go. Did they test it well enough before release?
nope - not even close. The thing is... somebody is making money on boink,
not sure who or how, but why else would you offer some of your own
(Seti's)

Agreed that Boinc is more complicated than s@h classic and that the
system is still being developed. Testing using the huge free group of
users is the quickest way to get the system developed. OK, so that might
be a slightly painful 'baptism of fire' sometimes.

Money? A big part of the problem is that THERE IS NO MONEY.

So why allow your WU crunchers to be lured away to other projects?
Why create a system that will reduce the amount of data processed?
surely not "oh we dont need that many crunchers"? but what if you could
offer part of your computing base to others wouldnt it be worth something?
Wouldnt it be a source of much needed revenue?

And an important IDEAL of SCIENCE is that the scientific work is done
for the good of all Mankind. It seems to work very well with the system
of open peer reviewed articles that 'give away for free' all useful
scientific results. Another example is "Open Source" software that is
freely available, peer reviewed, and usualy vastly better than the more
expensive 'proprietary' restricted stuff.


[...]

part of Seti's base user group is now working on other projects, and its
only possible due to boink -  it wasn't possible with Seti classic.

And that is another important part of Boinc. s@h will not have enough
data to keep everyone always busy. 

Oh really? No i dont think thats true. They can always increase the workload
by adding new tests and shortly they are supposed to have the ability to
gather far more data in a much shorter time (or so i have heard).

There are also lots of other DC 
projects 'reinventing the wheel' for the projects infrastructure.
Combining all into Boinc is a VERY GOOD IDEA for a number of Very Good
Reasons.

This is a scandal in the making - mark my words. The whole story of boink
isn't known yet but it will come out eventually. Think about it, i know
it sounds wacky but... just think it over.
We've been boink'd alright, and boink'd good!

Yep. All good fun and good science and now good for s@h AND other DC
projects.

Hang in there.

Good luck,
Martin

BTW: i want my tinfoil hat back Damnit! and i want it now! some other
peckerhead's got it and i want it back.
Eric