UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
  Get 3DNow! Message Board
  DCypher.Net Support Forum
  ULTIMATE goal

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author Topic:   ULTIMATE goal
Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted January 26, 2000 07:52     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
I'd like to know what about our ULTIMATE goal when cheating problem still exists?
Is it going to be still the same? Each false packet decreases number of rays that we simulate by 5mln. So if the problem still exist it will be essential to increase ULTIMATE goal value.
Maybe I'm wrong and ULTIMATE includes surplus for cheated blocks ?? I think this value was set with much extra rays just to make competition last longer, cause such number of rays is not really needed for making better containers?
Essential would be to ask author how he or team of specialits want to use each single ray to make better containers.
Is there any people that want to make them with results we produce or it's only a good wish of author of project???
Besides I'd like to know sample data (some of them) client calculates and a result (Gamma Flux) in numbers? Is it possible you guys from DCypher.Net told me what are sample real values for this simulation?

I wanted to ask Peter for it but he is still not available and I come to think he is not interested with discussing with people that want to help him... something's wrong.

Aren't we going to simulate a nuclear bomb explosion??? Who could answer it. Are here in this forum any phisics specialists to make it clear???

All client work in the state like is now is like a blackbox. We don't see what's generated and what's result. I know that result is a Gamma Flux, but how big is this value, how changes? what's the range of Gamma Flux values? and what does it mean 'Gamma Flux' in general in other words, what this could be compared to? heat genarated by radiation?
I know that this is really short time project, but maybe it would be better to think in future of any input/output for client?

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited January 26, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited January 26, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Troodon
Follower of Athlon
posted February 06, 2000 08:26     Click Here to See the Profile for Troodon     Edit/Delete Message
Maciek very good questions. I want to see them answered too.

IP: Logged

Osiris
Priest of Athlon
posted February 06, 2000 12:34     Click Here to See the Profile for Osiris     Edit/Delete Message
Troodon,

All these questions have been answered in other places on this forum.

Steve

IP: Logged

Troodon
Follower of Athlon
posted February 06, 2000 14:34     Click Here to See the Profile for Troodon     Edit/Delete Message
Even this "Aren't we going to simulate a nuclear bomb explosion??? "?

IP: Logged

Armin
High Priest of Athlon
posted February 06, 2000 14:47     Click Here to See the Profile for Armin     Edit/Delete Message
Hmm. I think I leave that one up to the reader as an exercise:

Can a chain reaction be simulated in a distributed network with high result latencies?

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 06, 2000 18:21     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
I checked the forum for these answers... you haven't answered these questions - most important is ULTIMATE goal question and sample data, cause I still don't know what my client crunches.

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 06, 2000 18:30     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
Armin: that's why we are doing this for such a long time
As far as I know we are simulating now REAL PHENOMENON- so why not to simulate "chain reaction"? Result latencies are not important as we simulate short period of time (rather state of Gamma Flux at some moment I think) for some months...

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 06, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Ken_g6
Follower of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 12:12     Click Here to See the Profile for Ken_g6     Edit/Delete Message
I feel like I've said this before, but try Peter Jansson's FAQ, especially parts 1, 3, and 4. Maybe they should be linked to in DCypher.Net's FAQ?

Ken

[This message has been edited by Ken_g6 (edited February 07, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Armin
High Priest of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 04:12     Click Here to See the Profile for Armin     Edit/Delete Message
Thanks, Ken. Mike, add them?

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 06:31     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
FAQ only says about what's going inside - how can I believe in it if I cannot see algorithm and any input/output guys????
Why not to publish algorithm and say that for such input numbers gamma flux is.... and so on That's what I want and will always be requesting
You know exactly what's going on as you implemented Peter's algorithm into client code. What's more - you even checked if it works properly with some real values (input/output)- I cannot imagine other way of checking client work (scientific part)...

You think that people are not interested in it? Boring? Better run client and trust anyone it crunches what is said not what is shown?

Of course you may say that Peter will show it on his viewer... but how can I check that it is real gamma flux WE SIMULATED? The only way is to check it for some numbers- what was taken into crunching, what was the result and compare it to what Peter showed at this point on his graph, understandable?

Besides ULTIMATE GOAL question was not for how big is this value and why (only THIS is explained in FAQ), but how this value is adequate for CHEATING ?

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 07, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 06:37     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
What geometry is now and what it will be in future? How it changes? Randomly?

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 17:28     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
One more thing: I know algorithms and program code are restricted for publishing.
So, I don't want you to publish code (it could be dangerous for project of course ).

But, why not to ask Peter for publishing Gamma Flux algorithm? It only depends on him whether he wants to show us how it is crunched and show example Gamma Flux data for this algorithm.

It would be a good lecture for people who are interested with creating their own distributed projects in the future

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 17:49     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
OK, guys, sorry for my bothering you, as you may have much important activities to answering my useless questions You don't have to answer, but keep in mind how people can see project from MY side...
All in all, we trust you guys from DCypher.Net that one day it does not occur we crunched something different to what we were said (not shown...) our client crunches...

IP: Logged

Osiris
Priest of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 17:56     Click Here to See the Profile for Osiris     Edit/Delete Message
Maciek,

What it comes down to is an issue of trust. Either you trust us or you don't.

We can't *prove* ANYTHING to you. We could (for example) draw pictures showing gamma flux, which simulating something else as well. Or we could show you an algorithm and SAY we use it. There is no way for you to really know.

In short: Do you trust us. That's why these questions boil down to. I have explained we will post numbers about total completion when we hear back from Peter. He is looking at the first batch of data right now. I have explained WHY I will *not* draw pretty pictures on the clients. I'm not sure how much else I can say on these matters as I am NOT a physicist.

Steve

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 18:05     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
Just as said before: I trust you Believe me. I only wrote what came across my mind... and probably not only mine
I know it's very hard to say that it's the algorithm WE USE.
I just only wanted to know the way it all is crunched. I could feel better If you showed me algorithm and sample data: BTW is Gamma Flux a "pretty picture"? According to Peter's equations it's a value... at some point of steel box.
Im bothering you with this questions cause I still have no answer from Peter. He only asked me to translate my homepage... but did not answer questions (almost the same as above)...

Thanks Steve for your answer My best regards

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 07, 2000 18:24     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
Could you just tell me what's the output for one simple ray? Graph made by Peter is based on each simple ray or based on group of them? In other words - is result one value for some rays or it's a different value for each single ray?

(I could multiply such questions with no end... why? cause I don't see algorithm - that's why I need to know it )

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 07, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Osiris
Priest of Athlon
posted February 08, 2000 02:22     Click Here to See the Profile for Osiris     Edit/Delete Message
maciek,

Peter is working on some pretty pictures for you folks.

Steve

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 08, 2000 12:07     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
OK. Let it be... But none of us (even you Steve) won't be able to check where are OUR results on these "pretty pictures"

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 08, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Shoe Lace
Follower of Athlon
posted February 08, 2000 19:14     Click Here to See the Profile for Shoe Lace     Edit/Delete Message
Maciek,
so what your really after is an external results visualzer???

------------------

IP: Logged

Slapyo
Follower of Athlon
posted February 08, 2000 19:56     Click Here to See the Profile for Slapyo     Edit/Delete Message
What I think Maciek is looking for is somthing like SETI@Home has...it shows you whats going on and also you have the coordinates so you can see where it is coming from. I dunno, I don't like that stuff, slows down the system too much.

------------------
Donnie (Slapyo)
Don's Web Site -- check it out everyone

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 08, 2000 20:05     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
Gamma Flux Visualizer... could be interesting
But each graph (pretty picture one say ) consists of some points; so to show them you need some coordinates, beginning values (that means input) and a result value for these numbers (that means output). I'd like to see only these numbers - not graph

Besides... aren't you just interested in what YOUR client results are? I AM
Who else is interested ?

*I hate SETI@Home, guys... but this project has only one advantage to DCypher.Net - one can at any time check what's the input and output of the client even with no graph (coordinates+gaussian).

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 08, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Osiris
Priest of Athlon
posted February 09, 2000 10:14     Click Here to See the Profile for Osiris     Edit/Delete Message
Maciek,

To output results in such a way that you could plot them would mean making the inner loop twice as complex. This is without the drawing code.. just teh code sampling the points.. this would make the core twice as slow.. most users would have my head for this.

Steve

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 09, 2000 11:55     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
OK, Steve I just wanted to know if there is a possibility to do it. You say it's not cause it'll make more inner loops in code that slow down the client. OK, it depends on algorithm and maybe this one is fully optimized, and there's no possibility to exclude single result....
How teh code is compared with draw code of Gamma Flux client then?

OK I don't want you to do this. But tell me how have you tested it works properly then?
To check if it's alright you must have compared results issued by client to some patterns hand make prepared?

OK, I don't want you to bother with my questions. All in all you're making a good job even if we are not able to check our client work and compare with total result showed by Peter on his *pretty picture*

I'd like you to tell me one more thing only: what can I say to my potential group members if they want to join us but would like to check from time to time what part of this steel box their client is working on?

According to what was said here the only answer is: "sorry man, you'll be able to check total work but not your own client if only Peter shows it on his page. Your client is doing a good work and remember - it does not waste your cpu cycles That's why you should join us "

... then he smiles, winks at me and passes away

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 09, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Slapyo
Follower of Athlon
posted February 09, 2000 20:30     Click Here to See the Profile for Slapyo     Edit/Delete Message
Heh, dude sorry but your kinda gettin on my nerves. I understand what your trying to say. I agree, it would be kinda neat to see actually where in the box we were doing the calculations. However, as Steve said it would double the time it takes, personally I don't care about the graphical part if it doubles my time. As for what is going on Peters page, you can already see output from data he collected with the applet. You won't be able to see what you did exactly and at what specific points. Heh, ya just keep pushin for those graphics. As for your people your tryin to get to use the program...if they don't wanna use it cause they can't get a graphical plot of the point they are doing, then you know what they don't use it. Simple as that man, I would be pissed if the client came out to show graphics and slowed me down that much. Heh, sorry, just that I have been reading these posts and it's gettin to me.

------------------
Donnie (Slapyo)
Don's Web Site -- check it out everyone

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 09, 2000 20:59     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
Calm down man... and read my posts more carefully - I wrote that I don't want any graph here - I use my client as service, too. But would like to see in any way how client works.
Don't expect MANY people will join these projects as they cannot see what's going on
That's what I still want to say...and nothing more. Finished.

Maybe you have any other idea how to make people join the project? or at least explain why only about 700 joined it so far?

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 09, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 09, 2000 21:32     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
I suggest to make a poll with a question: "Are you interested in possibility to see what your client results are?".

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 09, 2000).]

IP: Logged

Osiris
Priest of Athlon
posted February 09, 2000 23:08     Click Here to See the Profile for Osiris     Edit/Delete Message
Okay,

Let's just put a rest to it.

It will not happen.

EOS (End Of Story).

Steve

IP: Logged

Maciek
Follower of Athlon
posted February 10, 2000 04:05     Click Here to See the Profile for Maciek     Edit/Delete Message
OK - and that is enough. REALLY.
At first fix cheating problem....

Sorry. I promise to never ask you for my client work again.

[This message has been edited by Maciek (edited February 10, 2000).]

IP: Logged

All times are ET (US) next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

| Get 3DNow!


All submissions are copyrighted by their respective authors and are not for re-use in any form without their explicit written consent.

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.37
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998 - 1999.

Related Links