Posts by Egilman

1) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78889)
Posted 10 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
I do believe that there are some great ideas contained within the proposal, I just hope that some of them are introduced to Boinc itself rather than soley being for the purpose of bridging TACC with the body of Boinc users....

That is the unclear part, if he's proposing that Boinc being used in a way to bridge the gap between super computer clusters then it really doesn't matter to us individual boinc users. (except in the issue of the Gridcoin project) If it is an interface between the boinc user and the academic computing clusters, then it is of immense importance to us....

And many of us would have issues and questions centering around the who, what, when and where of what is being run on our equipment....

We want to know and we have a right to know..... It is our equimpent, isn't it?
2) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78887)
Posted 10 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
That's unfair and unwarranted.

This is not an advert for Gridcoin in any way. I am speaking from the heart when I say that changing BOINC would be a something I wouldn't want to be part of. The mentioning of gridcoin in my post is to tell anyone reading my post that the reason I have stayed BOINCing is a result of my discovery.
.......


Yet your doing pod casts for Gridcoin from the dev level..... http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/cm/gridcoin-community-hangouts/e/025-04032017-50076991

Right, some non-advertisement for Gridcoin..... Can you say falsehood?

How about we try this one.....
https://steemd.com/gridcoin/@mercosity/re-stevescoins-suggestions-for-gridcoin-to-earn-market-value-20160815t205813727z

How to strategies to improve GC's market share......

So much for the old guy with a hobby hanging around Boinc from the start looking to defray his electric bill....

Need I research more? Seems very fair and in this case warranted to me.....
3) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78812)
Posted 8 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
Can you keep the personal attacks out of the conversation, please?


I don't see any personal attack, But, that being said,

Will do.... (but it is a two way street)

And thanks for the reminder of why I don't post here very much....

I will now leave the conversation to the more erudite amongst us...
4) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78808)
Posted 8 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
.......

Sorry, that is propaganda, not experience. I have been there (though not in the pharmaceutical world.)


Propaganda? Ok, at least we know your biases. And are a believer in non-responsible science. (probably in the pursuit of greater profits, also, it is interesting that you didn't comment on Dr Oppenheimer's opinion of his life's work when he finally realized what he had done in the absolute pursuit of his goal)

Refusal to recognize that science in the pursuit of knowledge has killed and destroyed more than all the religions of the world combined is an ideopathic response to one who questions the efficacy of the absolute scientific model. (all science is good no matter what it results in)

Not trying to slam your opinion, just pointing out the logical fallacy inherent in it.
5) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78800)
Posted 8 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
This is the real benefactor with this as I see it. Small projects or projects with inconsistent work can plugin to a 'grid' of sorts. There are already several grid projects and this seems to be more open to any work.


That is only part of the equation, a very valid part yes, but the smaller part nonetheless.

The bigger part is plugging the crunchers into the national shared supercomputer grid. Making them available as a general resource to computer science. But to do that you have to assure two things,
always on and no choice...

He's aiming at the cellphone network of connected android devices..... Basically the young that really don't pay attention to what is happening on their hardware.

The other issue is revealed in his position that Boinc is a dead end as far as academia is concerned (TACC specifically) as the developer and main touter, this has the effect of leaving him behind, by getting Boinc patched into TACC his creation is now relevant again...

He's back on the cutting edge of DC in the scientific community....

We cannot ignore those personal motivations either since this has never been about altruism....
6) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78798)
Posted 8 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
Commercial work is the opposite. They start with a real problem, and try to find a solution. At least they are working in the right ball park.


"I have become death, the destroyer of worlds" Robert J Oppenheimer (quoting the Bhagavad-Gita) On his work in creating the thermo-nuclear device.

The problem with commercially motivated science is that the main focus becomes what we CAN do, not SHOULD we do it.....

Advancement without understanding is the hallmark of science for profit...

For example Celebrex, the revolutionary pain killing drug, touted as the savior of everyone in chronic pain.... Sold to millions for millions, and prescribed like candy.

Until it started killing people.....

Science with a profit motive is not the best approach in the practical world.....
7) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78782)
Posted 7 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:

.......

- We've studied volunteer motivations extensively; see the various papers by Oded Nov. More people are motivated by science goals than by credit.

-- David


Yes you've written two papers in collaboration with him and others, or maybe it was just a contribution to a paper...

Volunteer computing: a model of the factors determining contribution to community-based scientific research http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1772690.1772766 Published from WWW '10 Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web conference, April 26th 2010

And

Dusting for science: motivation and participation of digital citizen science volunteers http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1940761.1940771 Published from iConference '11 Proceedings of the 2011 iConference, February 11th 2011 (I attended this conference)

He's wrote a few other papers also on IT system design and human behaviors.

I take it you believe as he does.....

Just so you know I've been following your publications since your first in 2001 with Dan, Jeff, Matt & Eric....

So your turn to this type of model is kinda a surprise for me....

Just kinda trying to understand why your turning away from the open volunteer model?
8) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78779)
Posted 7 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
Good points David.

But let me point out something.

There are now over 2 billion android devices in the wild, in over 24k flavors. ALL of them connected 24/7, ALL of them doing background tasks even when turned off.

Android devices are very capable of doing distributed work, Boinc has proven that beyond any doubt. Both standard processing and parallel processing.

Sounds like your stating that the failure of Boinc is the user having to choose what work gets done. which leave some projects with an abundance of processing power and others starving for power.

TBD as described seems to be aimed at those social network devices that operate in the background, connected and communicating to the net, without the user knowing that they are still operating. That is the way they are designed.

So essentially your turning the social network system into it's own supercomputer to be used for whatever the desires of those running the net want it to do....

And the owner of the device has no choice..... to not participate he has to disable his device in a way that prevents it from communicating to the network. Which they are designed to NOT do.

You seem to be creating a system that is capable of eliminating a users choice altogether. Which is what you seem to view as the failure of Boinc.

I don't own an android device, cause a blind man could see this coming.

I will not allow my devices to be used for something I do not know what....

Just my feelings on the matter.

Unless I'm completely wrong....
9) Message boards : News : NSF funds new model for BOINC (Message 78722)
Posted 7 Jun 2017 by Egilman
Post:
Dr Anderson,

Personally, I think your developing your way out of volunteer computing.

Everyone I've had a chance to talk to about your TBD posting "http://boinc.berkeley.edu/tbd.php" of the 1st states unequivocally that in no way would they remain involved if you took their project/work choice out of the equation.

Neither would I.

Just my opinion but I am the #1 non-asic boinc producer in the world. We exchanged a few emails back in the old Seti I days concerning the last cheating scandal and the future. You iterated for me your vision of what Boinc was to be, and it was good. Turned me into a believer.

Your "TBD" proposal just tells me that DC has run it's course on a volunteer basis.

If it does come to fruition, I will not be along for the ride.....

Thank you for the 15 years of fun....

EG, formerly of Ars Technica, currently of Overclock.net

I sincerely wish you good luck with your proposal... (I just don't see how it is going to work for us individuals out here)
10) Message boards : Questions and problems : [Discussion] 4th Generation BOINC credit system (Message 69899)
Posted 2 Jun 2016 by Egilman
Post:
Egilman, you are right - fully commercial distributed computing networks are already in development, but not by Gridcoin. Most likely they will be based on Ethereum, whose market value (as we write this) is 500 times bigger than Gridcoin and still growing. So, your worries are indeed justified - people are in it for bucks and tomorrow they will happily switch to the network which pays more. It's just not happening here. You are giving altruism lessons to the wrong people.


Ethereum has a long way to go yet, but looks to be the future of the cloud, computing in general and Microsoft is betting on it.

But Distributed Computing as we know it is probably a decade away before it flips to Ethereum.

And I know I'm talking to a wall. But it get so frustrating to see everything good in the world going down the money rathole.

Gets frustrating. WE hated exposing the cheats in Seti I we were afraid of what it would show on our own team, Thankfully none (except for the proof of concept accounts we set up for verification)

And it was Rosetta that took the hit for the rumor that they were going for profit. (I was working at the UW when it happened)

There is always going to be those that look for the angle. I just wish it wouldn't happen here, Individual contribution to science is dying out to the corporate/government sponsored and financed conglomerate.

One of the last bastions of freedom.
11) Message boards : Questions and problems : [Discussion] 4th Generation BOINC credit system (Message 69848)
Posted 31 May 2016 by Egilman
Post:
When you need to insult/abuse your critics to defend your position from serious criticism.

Usually there is something funny (crooked) going on in the background.

Let me ask a question. if this is so great, why not take the open source boinc platform and devise you own crunching system and leave boinc out of it?

Why the need to take over the platform?

And yes there are programmers what will cheat any system you can devise. I mean Moore's law? you obviously have some smarts.

Windows ring a bell? they have been trying to lock windows down since they first wrote it, but every time they release a new version, the next day a hacked version is available on the undernet. The millions they pay for security and it's hacked before it is even released.

There is no absolutely secure boinc. A pipe dream all your trying to do is get boinc dev to work with you in your money making scheme.

You will lose the boinc community and you will never get them back

More importantly you will lose the reasearchers, as they will take the open source platform and develop their own.

Does any one forget what happened to the medical program when the rumor hit that they were for profit? it took them years to get their reputation and crunchers back.

You guys can be greedy all you want. you can also dupe the community into supporting you.

But just remember, if you really were altruistic and just trying to get the little guy some power deferment, why cite the current value of gridcoin? and it's potential?

You guys are in it for the bucks.

Your whole response and each insult nails that home.
12) Message boards : Questions and problems : [Discussion] 4th Generation BOINC credit system (Message 69835)
Posted 31 May 2016 by Egilman
Post:
Actually, the first cheating was discovered on Seti I. Those text based WU's were easy to scam in several different ways.

There were people all over the world amassing huge totals of credit for doing nothing.
I know this cause I was one of the six people on Ars Technica that helped expose it. That was before Boinc was ever put into operation.

Dr Anderson told us that Boinc would solve such problems but obviously it hasn't.

Now, with Gridcoin, your adding a financial incentive to cheat to the mix and want to change the whole credit paradigm to solve that for one specific groups advantage.

I say eliminate Gridcoin from boinc. That removes the financial incentive to cheat which will only make the problem worse. At the very least eliminate paying for crunch with bitcoin in any way.

This is how Gridcoin has grown to be the largest boinc team is by greed.
and yeah I am a member on the Gridcoin site and have seen how the creaters of gridcoin have the full intent to take over boinc and use it to their own ends.
First by becoming the dominant team in Bionc, and them monetizing boinc.

And lets not forget the profit in bitcoins of any type are based upon value/demand. More demand higher value. By completely monetizing Boinc, they create huge demand for their currency thereby increasing the value of the bitcoin they already hold. sure they pay a few sheckles out to the crunchers but that is far far far less than the value/demand they are creating. Which makes the gridcoin creators even more wealthy.

So answer me a question?

WHY would Boinc want to get involved directly with making a few people wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice when the original intent was to volunteer for science?

I'm also the world Number 1 cruncher in Collatz and Moo. My computers are not hidden and anyone can check the WU's and their crunch at any time.

Cheating has been going on since the moment distributing computing was formed. And will continue despite your best efforts to stop it. and that is simply to stay on top of a leaderboard. Much less being paid to be on top of that board.

Greed has driven Gridcoin to the great recruiting levels they have attained. greed is driving this initiative to adjust credit. and the only ones that benefit is the founders of gridcoin.

Everyone else will lose.

I say leave it alone, and eliminate pay for production from boinc. Remove greed as an incentive for crunching.

The scientific community will love ya for it as will most of the organized teams out there.
13) Message boards : Promotion : Come discus BOINC at noon EST today (12/21/15) & checkout these new articles on it (Message 67323)
Posted 28 Jan 2016 by Egilman
Post:
I agree that profiteering is not really in the spirit of distributed computing, but it may be a necessary evil to draw new users.


Well maybe it is something Berkeley doesn't have to concern it self with.

But something the individual projects will have to consider over time as their projects and names are being used for profiteering.

Over time there will be an effect of the freelance user will see their contribution and their teams contribution becoming less and less than the, (what is the term to use....) profiteering leeches take over the leader boards.

As users see that they are not really going to make any money off gridcoin, (only the crypto currency developers actually accumulate any real totals) they will leave the projects, but how many people like me they will drive away also?

I know over the last few years Boinc usage overall has been declining. lets throw greed into the mix to make the drive for user loss even faster.

Stats drive Boinc.

In many ways it is our statement to the world that we exist. If greed succeeds in driving the heavy volunteer away, what will be left for those good projects needing the computing power?

Shouldn't a project have the ability to decide if they wish to be associated with paid computing to benefit profiteers??

Shouldn't Gridcoin be made to start their own project ala Bitcoin Utopia? so their overwhelming desire for greed pervert the driving force (stats) for the rest of us?

Their production in seeking money is already taking over many projects.

Personally it is making me question my own involvement.

My Collatz production (#1 in the world) is about 7 tenths their entire collatz team production but at their rate of increase, my production will soon fall to half theirs and eventually to a small percentage.

Why should I spend hundreds of dollars for electricity each month on top of the thousands I spend building my farm, when I get no benefit from it? My team becomes irrelevant to the project?

Seems to me that the negatives towards project production outweigh the temporary surge in users hopelessly chasing a few thousandths of a penny..

Shame that Berkeley doesn't seem to think that it is not any concern of theirs.

Necessary evil, eventual worthless exercise.

It will destroy volunteer distributed computing.
14) Message boards : Promotion : Monetizing Boinc (Message 67311)
Posted 27 Jan 2016 by Egilman
Post:
BOINC is open source, anyone can use it for their science. Whether the project pays people to run their data, or asks for money to do so, is not up to BOINC to decide if that's possible or wanted, but up to the users. If no one adds a project that does things like this, the project will quickly turn around.

But on the other hand, being paid for doing the science of a project doesn't sound wrong to me. I'm sure that in hands-on science that happens as well, and besides in all other cases you pay for everything BOINC does with your computer. You fund the computer, the hardware therein, and the electricity it runs on. Might be nice if a project paid that back.

That one should be able to earn money running BOINC is my personal opinion, by the way. Don't look at my administrator or moderator titles for this, I have an opinion of my own away from BOINC as well.

Read some of their other forums and you will see that their actual intention is to take over Boinc and incentivize it for user profit.

By the way, do you have a link to the above?


I have no problem with Boinc being used to defray the costs of running it. or supporting a program that supports Boinc. Look at Bitcoin Utopia for an example.

I have a problem with Boinc being used for personal profit or as a tool specifically for profit by advertising.

Gridcoin is a team not a project, they stated that they intend to become the largest boinc team ever by advertising the ability to profit using it. and as an end result establishing their gridcoin cryptocurrency. They have been doing this for a while now and they have become the largest daily bionc producer. with the intent to become the dominant boinc group.

They have established their intents in their own forums. (highlighted text is the link you asked for)

Since the beginning, people are fighting for their (team) stats and NOT for any kind of reward. We, as the sub community, will eventually have to adapt to that system. Adaption means we have to USE the already existing incentive system for our own good.

I must establish my bonafides.

I was one of the six people at Ars Technica that exposed the Seti I text WU cheating scandal at the end of that project. Just before the start of Boinc.

I've been around a while. I currently boinc for team Overclock.net one of the more reputable Boinc communities, but I do not speak for them.

I am also speaking for myself as you are and the fact that I'm one of the top non bitcoin boinc producers in the world, must also say something.

I've invested one heck of a lot myself, and didn't take making this posting lightly.

They are not a project, they are a team, they are bending Boinc to their own use for profit. (By harnessing other users altruistic desires to contribute to science, the hook is for the user to defray some of the costs, all the while expanding their bitcoin network to the gridcoin currency developers profit)

If I remember what DA sent to me in one of his e-mails, Boinc wasn't intended for this at all.
15) Message boards : Promotion : Monetizing Boinc (Message 67296)
Posted 27 Jan 2016 by Egilman
Post:
I know the DC community should grow and we should contribute to whatever projects we feel good about.

BUT,

Should Boinc be monetized for profit?

Because it is already happening...

GRC on Kickstarter: PiGrid - get rewarded for helping research projects at home

Is this the way we really want to go?

Paying users to run Boinc?

Read some of their other forums and you will see that their actual intention is to take over Boinc and incentivize it for user profit.

Something that the Berkeley developers/staff should be taking a long hard look at. Especially the ramifications of their software being used to make money, Bitcoin or any other type of profit.
16) Message boards : Promotion : Come discus BOINC at noon EST today (12/21/15) & checkout these new articles on it (Message 67295)
Posted 27 Jan 2016 by Egilman
Post:
I would suggest you take a look as Gridcoin and how they are deliberately and specifically monetizing boinc.

Since it is the fastest growing team, and they intend to dominate all projects stats everywhere. I would suggest that making Boinc a paying proposition will expand it faster than anything else would.

But your volunteerism goes right out the window. Profit over science, not what DA ever intended for Boinc.

It is something to consider, and don't just listen to me, GO to their website and read.

They are very plain in their intent.

Something Berkeley needs to start considering is the tax ramifications if they continue to allow an organization to use their trademarked and copyrighted software and name for profit making purposes.

Kinda destroys the whole point of Boinc doesn't it?




Copyright © 2021 University of California. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.