paul
Granpa Paul
Premium,MVM,ExMod 2006
join:2001-07-14
clubs:  
1 edit | [BOINC] Focus (part 2)
OK people, there is more to this than meets the eye here, unfortunately. This thread »[BOINC] Focus - What Think Ye? was brought up by Ron because of a proposal in DCS by sortofageek from Helix that would put a stop to site approval for any BOINC teams that directly compete against their teams.
The proposal basically states that in order to have site approval, new projects that fall under the scope of existing teams, will need that teams approval first.
There are some projects under BOINC that have been developed by Stanford, Rosetta, and LHC. While most seem to be extensions of those projects, and not actually working on the same specific projects of Helix and Disco, they are from the same project developers.
There has been some extremely heated arguments in DCS about this very subject. What has happened in the early days of BOINC, it was thought that in order to crosslink a Site's teams, they all needed to be created by one person. Kinguni did this to most every new BOINC project that came up, thinking it would be great to have DSLR based BOINC team spanning all projects. What he didn't realize was the storm of from Helix and Disco protesting we were infringing on their team's scope.
So we are here with different BOINC teams that have been formed, with members from this team actively participating in them. Helix and Disco have the position that they are going to take a wait and see what happens with BOINC clients. They do not want us to have a BOINC team that is similar in scope to their projects, and want us to disband them. If in time, BOINC does take off as we envision it, and their projects either can or will run under BOINC, they will decide to adopt it or not.
What we here at Starfire believe is that this newfangled BOINC thingie is going to be the future of DC projects. I can't think of any major DC project that doesn't have or is in beta a version of their clients that run under BOINC.
On one side, we seem to have teams that are quite rigid in their structure. BOINC is not going to be run by them at this time, fears being strife created in their teams from adopting another client, and a loss of their membership if a BOINC client is run elsewhere on the site. So far, it certainly looks like the BOINC projects we have won't pull any of Disco or Helix's members. What members that do actively crunch them are Starfire members, and the occasional new person looking at DSLR for BOINC projects to run.
A valid concern, we had some major issues with BOINC when we were forced to adopt it. But once we got past the learning curve, we were comfy with it and learned to love it, actually. It's such a powerful client for just one project, and a dream for multiple projects.
So here is the question to you, the members of Starfire. Do we keep the teams we have under BOINC, with the intention of building strong BOINC based DSLR teams for all projects, like most bigger DC orientated sites SETI GERMANY, Dutch Power Cows, ARS Technica and the like? Or do we drop support for other BOINC projects in their infancy, and let the other established DSLR DC teams say yay or nay to them?
This is quite a serious subject and needs to be weighed heavily by active Starfire members only. This thread will be closely watched, and I will stop any flaming that may develop. Serious discourse only, please.
Paul
--
Distributed Computing.... The Search....
Proud member of the Cajun Crunch Team |
|
Xaak
You'll find me at T S W B.org
Premium
join:2002-06-19
1 edit | Just to be clear, here is the complete proposal as it stands now in the DC Support Forum. The current vote is 7 - 0 in favor with only one more vote needed to pass.
edit: This proposal was submitted by sortofageek from Team Helix. The text exactly is as it stands in the DCS forum
-------------------------------------
[All] Support of Unapproved DC Projects on this Site
We have discussed our differences about several projects Team Starfire wants to support on this site for months now. Probably everything has been said which could be said and we still have our differences. Some of us realize we have always respected the unique scopes of other teams and stayed within the unique scopes of our own teams with no need to write down rules or guidelines. Until recently. Now we are running into conflicts over that. Until this is resolved, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for us to move on to work together for the common good of all.
I am proposing we vote in the following to make it clear how we deal with projects not yet approved by site management and the courtesy each team needs to extend to the other teams in regard to team scopes. Anyone else think we should vote on this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A yes vote indicates agreement of all of the following and a no vote indicates disagreement with all or part of the following:
BBR DC Team Scopes (or Charters):
Team Discovery: Medical Research - current focus is on cures for cancer and childhood diseases
Team Helix: Medical Research - current focus is on understanding protein structure and folding with an aim at cure of multiple diseases.
Team RC5: Projects involving encryption and cryptography
Team Starfire: Primary focus is search for extra terrestrial life with secondary focus on earth and space science based projects (excluding projects related to medical research, encryption and cryptography)
The rules:
1. No team may support a DC project on this site which falls within the scope of another team, officially or unofficially.
2. If any member or members wish support, officially or unofficially, for a project not already approved by site management, the request should be made via a DCS member.
3. When a DCS member receives a request for support of an unapproved project, the request will be posted in the DCS Forum along with any justification given.
4. If the requested project falls within the scope (charter) of an existing team, the DCS representatives of that team will decide how the request should be handled. The other teams will not interfere in that process and will accept any decisions made by that team and its DCS reps whether to support the project unofficially to determine interest, request approval to make the project official, to consult with the team as a whole, or to recommend disapproval.
5. If the requested project is a medical research project which does not fall clearly within the current focus of either Team Discovery or Team Helix, the DCS reps from both teams will decide together how that request should be handled, with no interference from the other teams.
The Procedures:
1. Request comes in to support a DC project on this site which is not already officially approved.
2. The request goes to DCS.
3. DCS passes to Team Helix if the project is a medical project related to protein structure and folding. Team Helix makes the decision what request should be made to site management or not. Team Helix decides if it should just not be supported on this site at all, officially or otherwise. The other teams honor that decision.
4. DCS passes to Team Discovery if the project is a medical project, not related to protein structure and folding/misfolding, which focuses on cancer or childhood disease cures. Team Discovery makes the decision what request should be made to site management or not. Team Discovery decides if it should just not be supported on this site at all, officially or otherwise. The other teams honor that decision.
5. DCS passes to both TH and TD if the project is a medical-related project, but neither a protein folding or structure project nor one which focuses on cancer or childhood diseases. TD and TH make the decision what request should be made to site management or not. TH/TD decide together if it should just not be supported on this site at all, officially or otherwise. The other teams honor that decision.
6. DCS passes to Team RC5 if the project is related to encryption or cryptography. Team RC5 makes the decision what request should be made to site management or not. Team RC5 decides if it should just not be supported on this site at all, officially or otherwise. The other teams honor that decision.
7. DCS passes to Team Starfire if the project is within the Team Starfire scope; i.e., search for E.T. Team Starfire makes the decision what request should be made to site management or not. Team Starfire decides if it should just not be supported on this site at all, officially or otherwise. The other teams honor that decision.
8. If the project falls outside the scope of any existing team, DCS works together to determine whether the new project should be supported on the site.
--
Xaak
Xaak Consulting, LLC |
|
CyberSchnook1
Disciple of Christ Jesus
Premium
join:2005-08-26
USA
2 edits | reply to paul
The BS is getting knee-deep again around here.
I've stated from the start that DC Exec (WTF is DCS?) was an unnecessary boil on my butt, and apparently it's having another flare-up.
Buncha Neaderthals.
--
THE SENILITY PRAYER : Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference. |
|
Xaak
You'll find me at T S W B.org
Premium
join:2002-06-19
| reply to paul
I'll add my own observations.
Two things bother me most about this proposal.
First, the DCS has given a lot of lip service to making decisions as a community, but this proposal grants all teams sole approval or veto power on making a recommendation to management, even if the project in question is not related to the team's own projects.
The second thing is the way Helix members, with support from Discovery members have pushed this thru without much discussion, or even willingness to discuss it. The proposal was posted at around 9:15pm est on the 12th, and the vote was posted barely 18 hours later, after I asked for time to discuss Starfire's approach to the proposal with our team members. It was pushed thru fast and hard, and without the opportunity for proper consideration.
I agree with Paul's assessment. If this passes, there's no possibility we're going to see any official boinc medical teams here at BBR unless Helix or Discovery are forced to take them on by other forces. Even if it doesn't, their 8 vote block is enough to defeat any attempt to bring anything new here anyway.
So, do we leave our future to forces outside of this team, or do we take our future into our own hands?
I say we become the boinc team.
--
Xaak
Xaak Consulting, LLC |
|
CyberSchnook1
Disciple of Christ Jesus
Premium
join:2005-08-26
USA | said by Xaak  :...I say we become the boinc team. *SIGN* |
|
m00kie
Yes, Nurse Ratched
Premium
join:2000-09-11
| reply to paul
I don't like the idea of anyone having veto power that way. Absolute power corrupts and I wouldn't want our future determined in that manner.
We need to look at the big picture and to the future. Boinc is where DC is heading. If we don't get with the program we will be relegated to obscurity and eventually we'll all lose many members who wish to crunch for teams that support multiple Boinc projects.
I understand the concerns others may have but I fear those concerns are shortsighted. If this proposal stands we will be at the mercy of perhaps parochial concerns that will do nothing but diminish us over time.
--
Expand your universe... Join BBR Team Starfire |
|
Vericima
Beautiful But Deadly
Premium
join:2003-01-07
Manchester, CT | reply to Xaak
SIGN
What this sounds like to me, is that they are just now considering BOINC and feel threatened by us. The projects that we do that conflict with there's are secondary for most of us anyway. It's not like there's any real competition there. |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
 ·Embarq
 ·linode
| reply to paul
This all seems very silly to me, and way to political.
I don't know if we are the largest team on BBR, or not, but I can't help but feel this is an attempt by smaller teams to control what the larger wishes to do.
I myself am only interested in seti, and only crunch for it. Back when I first got started, I was also interested in the climate prediction project, and at one point was only crunching for them. I also used to be very interested in the rc5 projects over at distributed.net and ran those for about 5 years or so.
Now that I am part of a team, and doing seti, it has made it much more fun, as I watch myself and the team climb in rank.
In closing, I feel the team should be %100 focused on seti, and if other projects are of interest, then those projects should have their own separate groups, and names.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death! |
|
Sysadmin
NoBama
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-07
Sacramento, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to paul
This is a totally site political thing and that is why I was more than happy to leave the DCE (now DCS) when I did.
This amounts to nothing more than a power play by the two medical teams here at BBR. It looks to me that the DCS should have changed the name to DCC (Distributed Computing Control), this certainly is not something that would warrant the tag Support. |
|
SliderNC
Master Of Disaster
Premium
join:2002-12-12
Cornelius, NC
clubs:
·Windstream
| reply to paul
I've crunched for Seti and for Disco/TSC. I go back and forth depending on how I feel, however, this is my home.
So basically, if we as a BBR Team Starfire want to support another project that comes anywhere close to resembling something they do and use the BBR Team Starfire name, we need their permission?
Truthfully, the politics around here are what is will be the downfall of DC projects at this site and continue to be the thorn in the side of people getting along.
I love this place (BBR) and this forum. I lurk more than post, but nonetheless, you guys are family to me (as well as the America's Army clan here). I am here for the team and the science.
--
I'll believe that when my sh!t turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.
My LiveJournal |
|
ScottMo
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-15
Stony Brook, NY
1 edit | reply to paul
Helix had a discussion about it here: »[DCE] BOINC discussion
It might be better to read through that thread to discover what they're thinking then just to blanket brush the team as Luddites.
Be that as it may, I still think if the other teams don't want to transition to BOINC, then Starfire by default becomes the BOINC team. And that includes all BOINC projects. I don't think we can have a BOINC team and say we limit official status only to those projects deemed worthy or don't step on the toes of another team. BOINC is BOINC. Its a whole new world and the genie won't go back in the bottle.
I can understand why they Helix & Disco has reluctance- their projects already have mature, stable & useful clients that do things BOINC can't (with F@H, for example, I can limit the CPU to a max of 40% of my cpu to prevent overheating my office SFF P4 with crappy cooling).
But attempts to control are futile. Either join with BOINC (and keep a separate forum) or leave the entire pie to Starfire.
I still actively participate in Helix (#46 on the team) and did work on TSC phase 1 for Discovery. |
|
Xaak
You'll find me at T S W B.org
Premium
join:2002-06-19
| said by ScottMo :Helix had a discussion about it here: » [DCE] BOINC discussionIt might be better to read through that thread to discover what they're thinking then just to blanket brush the team as Luddites. Two things. First, it appears they don't have a choice on Boinc with Folding. Stanford apparently is linking the stats so it appears there will be a boinc Team Helix regardless. I'm not sure you'd see the same attitude from them if Stanford did it like HPF did, where you need to create a new team under WCG to participate under boinc. But that's partly speculation.
The second is that they're the driving force behind the proposal before the DCS, with sortofageek providing the proposal and mattmag forcing the vote.
--
Xaak
Xaak Consulting, LLC |
|
Kevint56
join:2006-03-29
Salt Lake City, UT
| Just a note here -
I know I am not a voting member of BBR, etc.. or any of the above, but this seems extremely silly. This is not meant to be a flame I am just trying to understand the organization here. At one time I was considering joining up with this team, but dang – political ? What’s up with that ? Is this not a hobby ?
I must be missing something here, obviously.
With “crunchenstien” to charters, bylaws the entire deal.
Is this a hobby or a corporation. I just don’t get it.
Why does there need to be a vote at all?
Just do it –
Why is “Starfire” set up with Broad Band Reports ? is there some history here ?
Why are there fragmented DC groups that “seem” to fight amongst themselves..
Shouldn’t there just be one team - Starfire pr Helix or what ever have you – does it REALLY matter ?
Someone can explain this to me, and help me understand. If I am to move my farm to here – I would need to understand what is going on and why it seems that this group of hobbyist that crunch for nothing have more charters and votes and regulations that most small governments. |
|
RPM Jack
Premium,MVM
join:2001-07-19
USA
clubs:
| reply to Xaak
Are y'all talking about "civil disobedience" or "civil war" (seceding from BBR)? I thought the DCS was the focal point for these conflicts, but it sounds like Team Starfire has decided the DCS' answer was wrong so TS will ignore it. If it comes to the point that site management decides TS has violated the site TOS (and the DCS guidelines) over this issue, what happens?
Speaking of politics, I assume the DC Exec worked fine when TS dominated it, back in the old days of "proportional" representation? 
I can see this discussion and the probable outcome "poisoning the well" and eroding any good will between the various DC groups here, which would be unfortunate, considering how the teams have helped each other in the past. I vaguely recall Team Helix contributing some resources to past TS efforts. Are the stats worth destroying the DSLR DC community?
--
"Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin |
|
Xaak
You'll find me at T S W B.org
Premium
join:2002-06-19 | The DCS is the cause of this particular conflict. We're just discussing it right now, but I'm sure if you stay tuned you'll get all the answers you need.
--
Xaak
Xaak Consulting, LLC |
|
mouseferatu
Too many cats, Too many mice
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-16
Im not sure
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Fairpoint Communic..
 ·Comcast
| reply to paul
It was my understanding that DCS business was to be posted within the DCS closed forum until a consensus was reached, at which time it would become public. I am uncertain, as I am not a DCS member.
I assume that I either do not understand those rules, or that Team Starfire does not need to adhere to them. Elaborate, if you will?
--
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crispy and good with catsup." |
|
uniquecp
Where'D It Go
Premium
join:2001-08-07
Scottsdale, AZ
| reply to Kevint56
said by Kevint56 :Just a note here - I know I am not a voting member of BBR, etc.. or any of the above, but this seems extremely silly. This is not meant to be a flame I am just trying to understand the organization here. At one time I was considering joining up with this team, but dang – political ? What’s up with that ? Is this not a hobby ? I must be missing something here, obviously. With “crunchenstien” to charters, bylaws the entire deal. Is this a hobby or a corporation. I just don’t get it. Why does there need to be a vote at all? Just do it – Why is “Starfire” set up with Broad Band Reports ? is there some history here ? Why are there fragmented DC groups that “seem” to fight amongst themselves.. Shouldn’t there just be one team - Starfire pr Helix or what ever have you – does it REALLY matter ? Someone can explain this to me, and help me understand. If I am to move my farm to here – I would need to understand what is going on and why it seems that this group of hobbyist that crunch for nothing have more charters and votes and regulations that most small governments. I will try,
The crunchenstein has all that due to the amount of money and equipment involved and a changing board, it was really supposed to help with making sure the money and equipment was protected.
Unfortunately it was written with a few to many rules and the current structure needs change and it is a tedious process due to the original document not leaving a lot of leeway.
Mostly they do not want to do something that lets anyone try to collapse the project, balanced with good use of very limited funds and the high cost of operating the various farms.
Not really business just a necessity; feel free too check their forum and it is explained in more detail there.
The DCS issue is a different ballgame
The explosion of BOINC has created a new problem in the eyes of Team Helix and discovery in that they run dedicated clients for their projects and are rightly concerned that the BOINC related projects will dilute their Teams
Probably will of they do not move to the BOINC platform and I know that F@H is looking at exactly that.
The problem has expanded due to the insistence that we should not suport or run other projects under BOINC without the ok of Helix or Discovery.
I know this has been discissed only shortly and not very well in the DCS but Helix has brought the issue to vote and we are trying to get feel for where our Team stands on this.
yes it is political, this is a large site and a great forum this requires some sort of structure to balance the needs of the DC teams with site management. and you know as well as I that means politics, no large forum exists without this.
To much to leave to chaos.
So yes it is a hobby and do not let this thread detract from that, I run a large farm myself and this is a great place to get info and talk about the science of the DC community and SETI so hang around and do not read posts with DCS in front of them 
We are affliated with BBR because there are a ton of worthwhile forums here and this where the Team started a long time ago. It is a great Team (sans politics on occasion) and we are focused on SETI and the science its just there is not much to talkabout after you get through installing the client and looking at the Star chart so you have stats to keep it interesting and Teams to share the comraderie with.
If you decide to join Welcome, if not good luck keep on crunching for that is what its about
--
Things in your rearview mirror are much larger than they appear |
|
Xaak
You'll find me at T S W B.org
Premium
join:2002-06-19
| reply to mouseferatu
Issues that affect the team need to be discussed by the team. While the DCS is a closed forum, it's not secret. This issue certainly affects our team and therefore will be discussed here.
Things of a sensitive or confidential nature will not be disscussed outside of the DCS beyond any decision we reach on those issues. This is neither sensitive nor confidential, so it is fair game discussing it in public.
I hope this answers your question.
--
Xaak
Xaak Consulting, LLC |
|
mouseferatu
Too many cats, Too many mice
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-16
Im not sure
clubs: | It does, and I thank you for the courtesy of a reply in your forum. |
|
Xaak
You'll find me at T S W B.org
Premium
join:2002-06-19 | You're welcome |
|
