Hey, Lounge. Check this out.

This is a great idea. I signed up. Effortless and feels good.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5672092

but I don't understand it.

But I think it runs a program in the background of your computer that does mathematical processes for this project at Stanford University.

Read Will Pitt's question and the answers. That is how I understand it.

Distributed Computing involves using computers from around the world to run calculations, simulations etc. Projects such as Folding@Home use spare computer cycles to run calculations and simulations to further their knowledge and research.

Users can help by installing a program onto their computer that will download data and then use spare cpu cycles to run the calculations. The results are then fed back up to the computers at the main project site. Researchers can then use the results to further their knowledge.

There are enough people trying to peek into my life. I certainly don't need to give someone the key to the front door.

put to rest.

Security of the FAH client/DC is very important to the Pande Group and they have designed the FAH DC as secure as feasible - crypted downloads/uploads, file checksums, ... Because of it the FAH client should not reduce the security of your computer.

The FAH client does not collect any personal information from your computer - there is no need for it.

After the initial client is installed, all Stanford will send you is a work unit that is only a few kilobytes in size, everything is encrypted and checked to be sure the content is from Stanford.

You've got more to worry about being using a web browser than doing this.

All it does is download a program tailored to work on a set of calculations, which it does in the background while you use your computer normally, then sends the data back to a central location when it is done. Then, it gets another work unit and starts again.

I've been doing things like this project for a very long time. I've never had a problem.

I'm not using them.

It's a terrible waste of electricity not to do that; I think the savings in energy usage are more important in the larger scheme of things than even such a noble undertaking.

Redstone

Doing something like this actually has the opposite effect in that it utilizes your CPU's wasted cycles, of which there are billions upon billions over the lifetime of a computer.

The biggest energy hog with your computer is the monitor, and the monitor doesn't need to be running for this.

Regardless, the work itself is being done, and the work is incredibly worthwhile. Whether that work is done on one computer or a million computers, the energy usage will be comparable. It just will take less time if it is done on millions of computers.

And, finally, you don't actually need to have your computer running all the time. The work unit will take up where it left off if you stop it and then restart it again, and as mentioned originally, if you're running it while your computer is drawing power, you're allowing your wasted CPU cycles to be used for something other than burning energy that does nothing.

And one word will explain that: Photoshop.

I'm not trying to discourage anyone else from doing this; if your computer loafs along all day with only a Word document or an Excel spreadsheet active at any given time, which I suspect is fairly common, do join the program.

Redstone

I'm surfing the Web, playing MP3's and editing Holiday pics in Photoshop Elements. No problem whatever.

Nope.

Photoshop executes tasks that momentarily tax the CPU, but not for long. In fact, Photoshop taking up 100% of the CPU cycles is considered a problem and was actually a known bug in some previous versions.

The only time my system even approaches using 100% of its clock cycles is when it is rendering a video or music file, and even then it is not constant. Photoshop's usage of CPU time is rather minor by comparison. (As an aside, when I first started doing this, I found it rather disconcerting that my CPU usage was *always* at 100% simply because that never happens. I keep an app running that displays a graph of CPU usage on my desktop, and I'm accustomed to it showing a wave, not a solid line locked to the top.)

Everyone has wasted CPU cycles.

In any case, if you don't want to do this, that's fine. I'm just saying that the reasons you stated previously don't really apply.

seriously

Way cool:toast:

pharmaceutical companies. That has been my position on folding@home for years (though I never try to dissuade anyone else).

Edit: I am a big fan of distributed computing, but I go the SETI and Climate route.

eom

http://vspx27.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teampage&teamnum=36120

Sign up NOW!

There are thousands of computers owned by DU members around the world. While they do many productive things, the majority of the time these computers run screen savers or sit cold and alone waiting for something to do. This is a tremendous waste of computing power.

Just think of what all of these idle computers could do if they combined forces and were put to productive use 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

Download the software and sign up on the Folding@Home website: http://folding.stanford.edu

DU's team number is 48157

Kick for evening crowd -

You Know Who You Are.

More CPUs!!! Let's kick this project into High Gear and wipe the Freepers' mocking smiles off their faces.

We support it at work and I have it run on my work PC.

It really is a wonderful thing to do with your PC.

http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/

at least for 50% of available capacity

done for the New Year.

Check your Inbox for the new link.

Rockin' and Foldin' -- look out Freepers!

More CPUs!!!

:)

:kick:

C'mon, DUers! More CPUs for the team!