They never solved this problem: Problems with download of WUs: Either no work or overcommitted

Now I only receive 8.2 credits/hour for Rosetta while I get a little over 20 credits/hour from SETI@Home and Einstein@Home. Not worth the trouble, time and electricity.

Detached from Rosetta.

---

Hopefully the SETI folks will explain to Martin that Rosetta doesn't decide how much work to download, BOINC does. Our efforts to explain it to him appeared to sink in when he stopped asking about it. And since he ran for months without further mention of it, I take it he's off to chase bigger virtual numbers.

---

Add this signature to your EMail:
Running Microsoft's "System Idle Process" will never help cure cancer, AIDS nor Alzheimer's. But running Rosetta@home just might!
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/

They never solved this problem: Problems with download of WUs: Either no work or overcommitted

Now I only receive 8.2 credits/hour for Rosetta while I get a little over 20 credits/hour from SETI@Home and Einstein@Home. Not worth the trouble, time and electricity.

Detached from Rosetta.

if you had cancer or had someone in the family with it i bet those three issues would be gone and seti@home would take a back seat

---

I'm perplexed at the claimed versus granted credit from what looks like a standard client. David Kim is getting around 0.54 on one of his macs, while Martin is getting 0.15 for new credit/old credit. (and 9.54 credits/hour from the data listed from successful WUs.)

---

Now I only receive 8.2 credits/hour for Rosetta while I get a little over 20 credits/hour from SETI@Home and Einstein@Home. Not worth the trouble, time and electricity.

Yep, that is what my quad G5 gets (per processor).

The optomized SETI application from alexkan really speeds up the crunching for Macs at SETI. If you have a mac (g5 or intel), and you are looking for credits, that is the way to go. The crunching board @ SETI has instructions to build your own linux or windows optomized application too.

---

Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

Administrator, in all fairness: we haven't crunched anything unknown so far either. All we've done is help refine the Rosetta algorithm and search methods, making it more efficient - the same could be said for Einstein@Home.

In the end, most projects have some sort of value and it's up to the user to see which one they want to dedicate their computer to. I will, however, concede that Seti@Home is a pretty bad example of a useful project - they should encourage users to at least dedicate part of the ressources to another one instead of crunching the same work unit 5+ times...

The idea to keep an open ear for possible extraterrestial communication isn't all that bad. Even if the odds are incredibly low, it doesn't take much and the possible consequences are massive.

Then you have projects looking for larger prime numbers. I'm not sure what kind of application that'd have, I think it can be used in encryption though.

---

If you read the last two DB jounal entries, I think that you will see that the project is moving beyond just perfecting the program. Actual research appears to be comming.

---

Keith Akins

If you read the last two DB jounal entries, I think that you will see that the project is moving beyond just perfecting the program. Actual research appears to be comming.

I think even if the project will work for years to come only on improving folding methods - that would be fine with me, it is by itself very worthwile task.

Soriak

The idea to keep an open ear for possible extraterrestial communication isn't all that bad. Even if the odds are incredibly low, it doesn't take much and the possible consequences are massive.

I'm SETI fun. But my opinion - technology is not ready yet. And yes, government should spend billions on SETI. But not now. May be like in 150 years from now. 15 years ago there was no cell phones and no internet. And now I browse world wide web through PDA wirelessly connected to the internet by bluetooth/gprs. I do think technology will improve big time in next couple centuries, and current SETI attempts would look simply silly and naive...

---

But be careful - most of other projects - like world community grid or fightAIDSathome is completely useless.

Administrator, can I ask you to expand on this please?

Oh, for example WCG was running project that determine 3-d shapes of protein of humans and dozens of other genomes. They were doing that for couple years. Last time I checked - they did not implemented publicly available database with results of the project. What D. Baker says : "These efforts used the low resolution version of rosetta (which is all we had several years ago when the HPF project started);" And even if they create that database they were going to - do you think researchers would use it or they run newer version of Rosetta for proteins they interested in? What was thouse thouthands years of CPU time for?

Do you own reserch for FightAIDS...

---

Administrator, That was all Dr.Baker had then as well. You could also say what was the point of any of the Good work Dr.Baker and his team did then in taking things forward and developing things further with Rosetta ? That is all anyone had then, as regards to Rosetta. WCG are doing higher resolution work now, so what you say is nonsense at best. These things move forward in phases and no doubt Dr.Baker and his team will come up with a further improved version of Rosetta for all to use in the future. Dont forget the Cancer work, as well as the Aids work being done there too.

---

Hi Administrator and John,

please refrain from personal attacks against each other.

@Administrator
It would be useful if you could word your statements a bit softer. Instead of saying "is complete waste" you may say "seems to me not useful" or something like that. I know that posting styles differ but if you want responses to your content rather than your attitude it would be helpful if you could do so.

@John Gann

IIRC, Administrator has another acount with which he crunches but had problems to switch it for the boards and while I agree that his wording is a bit harsh he is entitled to his opinion.

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

I think what Administrator was trying to say is this:

He doesn't believe that with the current technology a search for extraterrestrial life or gravitational waves is useful. He further believes that with the current stage of protein prediction capabilites no 'productive' search is useful, since the reliability is too low to draw any conclusions. Although I would not word it such peremptorily I tend to agree with his opinion. That's why I'm glad to contribute to a project which primary focus is to improve the prediction capabilities.

Mod.DE
Sorry, just frustrated.

To that end.

I'm out. Don't need what the boards have become.

I will finish all the WU's I am working on first.

Have fun....

Been Real...

---

I think what Administrator was trying to say is this:

He doesn't believe that with the current technology a search for extraterrestrial life or gravitational waves is useful. He further believes that with the current stage of protein prediction capabilites no 'productive' search is useful, since the reliability is too low to draw any conclusions. Although I would not word it such peremptorily I tend to agree with his opinion. That's why I'm glad to contribute to a project which primary focus is to improve the prediction capabilities.

If the HIV/Aids and cancer work (Independent of Rosetta) ever pauses for any reason at WCG , HPF is still a way to get feedback to the Rosetta team BTW. Dr. Baker seems to think there is some reliablity in the current state of Rosetta. Look at his journal. How could he possibly move on to any of his other work he mentions ?

---

...we haven't crunched anything unknown so far either. All we've done is help refine the Rosetta algorithm and search methods, making it more efficient - the same could be said for Einstein@Home.

Actually, we HAVE! All of those CASP work units we crunched all Summer were of unknown proteins. One way to look at the quality of Rosetta as compared to other projects is to think about verification. I mean if SETI studies static for years and turns up nothing... is there any confirmation that they've run the project well? That they're attempting the best course for finding ET? How do you know they haven't missed ET's call?

With Rosetta, every 2 years CASP challenges the scientific community to a duel. See who can make the best blind predictions. CASP is an autonomous group that does the judging of the results and makes every effort to run the tests in a controlled mannar. The goal of CASP is to accurately assess which scientific teams have the best models produced. You will find Bakerlab historically kicks it at CASP. They produce the largest number of highly accurate models. More then any other research group. These results are independantly verified, and there are scores of other teams working on the same problem, and not producing results that are as good.

So, with Rosetta, the scientific community, via CASP, and the other teams participating in CASP, has verified their work is meaningful, and significantly more advanced then other teams. It is these advances in the science that Rosetta is striving for, and we are all helping them to develop.

---

Add this signature to your EMail:
Running Microsoft's "System Idle Process" will never help cure cancer, AIDS nor Alzheimer's. But running Rosetta@home just might!
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/

But be careful - most of other projects - like world community grid or fightAIDSathome is completely useless.

Administrator, can I ask you to expand on this please?

Oh, for example WCG was running project that determine 3-d shapes of protein of humans and dozens of other genomes. They were doing that for couple years. Last time I checked - they did not implemented publicly available database with results of the project. What D. Baker says : "These efforts used the low resolution version of rosetta (which is all we had several years ago when the HPF project started);" And even if they create that database they were going to - do you think researchers would use it or they run newer version of Rosetta for proteins they interested in? What was thouse thouthands years of CPU time for?

Do you own reserch for FightAIDS...

Administrator, the quote you refer to by Dr Baker seems to be taken somewhat out of context as according to a post by him on 22nd August in his journal, he appears to saying it is all ANYONE had at the time the HPF project started, not just WCG.

He also also appears to be collaborating with WCG on the new HPF2 project, and producing manuscripts on the results of HPF1 - I would think it highly unlikely he would do so if the work is useless wouldn't you???

Thre seems to me to be much similarity in the work.

I'm working tonight on a manuscript with my former graduate student Rich Bonneau on some of the results from HPF1 done on the world community grid. We predicted structures for all the proteins in one of the best studied eukaryotic organisms--the yeast used to make bread and beer, and then integrated these predictions with other experimental data to assign 500 proteins of previously unknown structure to protein structural families. After this is done, we will start working on the report on the structures of human proteins also done in HPF1. These efforts used the low resolution version of rosetta (which is all we had several years ago when the HPF project started); I am of course excited about HPF2 which is using the protocol we have been improving on rosetta@home (I sent Rich and the collaborators at IBM the code last March) and should produce much more accurate models

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=1177#24241


As regards your request to "Do you own reserch for FightAIDS..." - surely if you make an unsubstantiated critism, then it is up to you to qualify it?

---

Crunching In Memory Of My Dad

Mod.DE
Sorry, just frustrated.
To that end. I'm out. Don't need what the boards have become.
I will finish all the WU's I am working on first.
Have fun....
Been Real...

Would contributors known as "BurnHard" and "John Gann" please contact me?

Based on your postings, I suspect you will like an idea to put some of the childish things going on here to rest, and allow those who are serious and
large contributors to remain for the right reasons.

Our moderator has agreed to exchange emails amongst us, if both parties agree. He is at: 'rosettamod at gmail . com'

---

...we haven't crunched anything unknown so far either. All we've done is help refine the Rosetta algorithm and search methods, making it more efficient - the same could be said for Einstein@Home.

Actually, we HAVE! All of those CASP work units we crunched all Summer were of unknown proteins..

They were unknown to the general public, but not unknown in the way that no one knows their actual structure ;)

No computational approach to predicting the structure of proteins is advanced enough yet to be used instead of the expensive lab methods. That'd be the ultimate goal - replacing those entirely. Rosetta@Home did better than any other group at the CASP 2 years ago, this time "we" will hopefully win again. (I know Dr. Baker doesn't like to call it winning, but let's face it: being most accurate in this challenge equals winning ;))

---

They were unknown to the general public, but not unknown in the way that no one knows their actual structure ;)

Actually... Wasn't that the point? No human alive, at the time the challenge protein was released by CASP knew the native structure. And, only approximately at the time of the submissions deadline, was the actual native analysis completed.

No computational approach to predicting the structure of proteins is advanced enough yet to be used instead of the expensive lab methods. That'd be the ultimate goal - replacing those entirely.

That's what we're all contributing to. I think it might be more accurate to say that Rosetta works very well for certain classes of proteins. In fact many other scientific teams use it in this mannar today. But there are other classes of proteins which Rosetta needs to learn more about in order to accurately predict their structure.

Keep in mind that even if the Rosetta prediction doesn't match the native form EXACTLY, it is often close enough to assess relevance of potential drug candidates.

---

Add this signature to your EMail:
Running Microsoft's "System Idle Process" will never help cure cancer, AIDS nor Alzheimer's. But running Rosetta@home just might!
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/

Thanks. For pissing off one our most important Team-SciFi Rosetta members resulting in him deciding to just quit. You have not only hurt him, you have hurt our team.

John, please come back to us and ignore this board, as most of us usually do anyway.

And one more thing John: Check out the statistics for this "Administrator" person. You let a person with zero credits here and zero RAC get to you. At least, that is what is showing up for him right now. Don't. Ignore him. Ignore this board. Come back to our team and our boards, where sanity awaits, and the joy of team crunching can be re-experienced.

---

The Liver is EVIL. It must be PUNISHED!

Team-SciFi