PDA

View Full Version : Acceptance of Commercial(?)


Rusty
6th July 2009, 04:17 AM
There has been some heated and not heated debating about weather Commercial projects should be allowed/added into the DC-Vault.

Now I know everyone has probably talked this one to death, but I think this topic deserves it's own thread, dont you.

My personal views are that if someone makes money off the work we do, then it's not on.. Now I am all for projects getting grants or donations to keep the project alive and active but when a project make cold hard cash off the electricity we pay for, then once again I disagree. However, that is my thoughts and if this is the case, I will not crunch that project, with the exception of a project that I believe in or I should say research I believe in.

BUT

This thread is NOT aimed at any project in particular, it is aimed at Commercial projects in general.

We(admin) are not currently looking at changing anything at this stage.

So invite your friends, invite your fello team mates and join a conversation.
Say what you think!

Rules:
No flaming or insults. Flaming.insulting will result in a warning's and even bans.(If you feel you have been insulted, re-read what the person has written and try it from a different angle. Then Contact me)
Don't talk about a project. Just in general. If you use something from a project site, make sure you post the link to the info please.
No flaming a project

Sport
6th July 2009, 06:15 AM
I'll hold my vote for now, though I'm 100% sure how I feel on this issue!

Rusty,

I've got your back on this one brother!


I'll reiterate what Rusty said ...
THIS HAS TO REMAIN CIVILIZED!!!

My perspective and only mine.....
1. This is the DC-Vault...not Boinc-Vault, which means that non-Boinc projects {{ Dimes, Folding, EON, Muon, and others}} carry the same weight as WCG, Docking, NQueens and the rest

2. CPU projects and GPU projects just by their very nature are going to have some disparities. GPU is in it's infancy, but looks to able to mature and there will be issues arise

3. this thread has NOTHING to do with #1 or #2! This thread is about commercial vs noncommercial predjudices.

That said I'll get to my point

My friends, especially in these difficult times the Dollar, the Yen, the Peso, the Rupal, the Dinar....whatever; is going to come into play in every aspect of our lives. Sorry but economics is truly what makes the world 'round.

Every man, woman, child, organisation, entity or project has a cash flow; positive, negative, or balanced; there is money moving in and out.

Someone is paying for the server space and bandwidth I'm using right now at http://DC-Vault.com. Some one is paying for the server space and bandwidth I'm using to connect to NQueens. The same goes for all the projects I am or ever have or ever will crunch at!
Be it grants, donations, tax deferments, or good old fashion free enterprise, there is a cashflow.

The DC-Vault rules for inclusion......

Project eligibility is governed by the following guidelines:

The project must:

be active
accept new members and teams immediately upon registration
have parsable team stats
have team stats that are updated regularly
provide a client program which runs on a local PC The project must not:

be a keylogger or mouseclick counter
have a maximum number of teams or members or exclude any country

this may be perceived as written in stone or may be perceived as open for adjustment.

When was the last time these rules for inclusion were altered? And how long ago were they drawn up?

My point is that every project has a cashflow; I don't care where it comes from; if I see a reason to attach my machines to it, I will; whether it is DC-V approved or not. If I don't like a project, that's my option as well

As someone stated in another thread ..."This rhetoric and $1.06 will buy me a small cup of coffee"

Rusty
6th July 2009, 12:54 PM
People are voting and not replying/posting.

So far 2 people have posted and 4 votes..

Zachariassen
6th July 2009, 01:45 PM
No surprises here - I'll vote NO !
I don't accept anybody to make a profit for nothing - but... I do accept commercial project if they gonna share 'the money' with the guys who are doing the 'hard work' (us - the crunchers). As I said in another thread - If they pay me, I'll work for them :)
So - the world isn't black or white - as a general rule I'll say NO - but (there is always a 'but') - If the commercial projects - one way or another - are sharing their profit (but not their losses ;D)- I'll say YES.

cswchan
6th July 2009, 01:58 PM
Sorry... one of the YES votes was mine... Include the project... let the individual decide whether he/she wants to run it!

Razor_FX_II
6th July 2009, 02:00 PM
I vote NO to the acceptance of Commercial projects in the DC-Vault.

The DC-Vault is used by many teams as a way to compete by score with each other with no gain for their teams. If a project is put in the DC-Vault it then becomes part of the competition.

This is the very reason I think Commercial projects want to be included in the DC-Vault to reap the gains of the team competitiveness.
This makes me feel like I am being used for someone else's gain when all I intended doing was to have some competitive fun and do some good along the way.

Commercial projects are for monetary gain and thus should fund their own computational needs.
The non commercial projects need our help and without it would not be able to survive.
Let us focus our help on the projects that need our help not the ones who want to save money by using our good will and competitiveness for their gains.

Yankton
6th July 2009, 02:17 PM
I voted no. If the company is just in this for the cash and is closed source on the results, then let them spend some money on some mainframes to crunch their data for them. I feel that anything that I contribute to should end up in the public domain.

KAMCOBILL
6th July 2009, 07:37 PM
I voted yes. One reason and the most inportant is if we make money making projects not suitable for the vault, then 90% or more of the project will have to be removed. Another is it's a better project than 50% in the Vault now.

Jathanis
6th July 2009, 08:26 PM
I voted no. If the company is just in this for the cash and is closed source on the results, then let them spend some money on some mainframes to crunch their data for them. I feel that anything that I
contribute to should end up in the public domain.

I vote no, for pretty much this reason right here. I agree with what Razor_FX_II said, and personally fold for causes I like as much as I can. By adding a commercial project to the Vault, I then end up with the choice of participating in a project I don't agree with the methods of, leaving it up to other team members to carry the load in that project without me, or watch my team fall in the rankings... For example, I don't believe that SETI is likely to accomplish as much as F@H or WCG, so I don't do SETI - and I think a lot less of any commercial group "using" the DC community! And while I mostly do this for the science, etc, it's sure a lot more FUN to have actual rankings to work for!

sirmonkey
6th July 2009, 08:51 PM
voted no.. id have to agree that commercial businesses do not belong in the vault.. this is about competition and having fun.. none of these groups make a profit off anything... WCG, F@H, climate prediction just to name a few off the top of my head.. if the company wants to me pay me.. then thats a different story.. but im sure as hell not doing work for them for free while they get rich off it..

Xaverius
6th July 2009, 09:17 PM
I voted no for the reasons given by the other no-voters.
The 90% being commercial KAMCOBILL is talking about, is that a solid number or just a guess?

Bold_Seeker
6th July 2009, 10:38 PM
Hello all, I specially registered to be able to vote NO.
Why? Because I am against the idea that a company makes profit
on behalf of the DC community. The introduction of a commercial
project in the DC-Vault would ruin fair competition and possibly pressure
people into joining that commercial project solely for keeping the team in
a high rank, thus creating a moral dilemma.

I'm in for the competition and for the science that's being done. Not for
"sponsoring" people that will make hard cash over my back.

Sure, I can decide not to join that project, but if the team that we (DPC) are trying to pass joins that project then we might not have a chance to
ever pass that team, because there could be a gap of 10.00 points wich can hardly be compensated.

xorsist
6th July 2009, 11:14 PM
Hi all, I also registered to vote NO on this project.
I object to projects in the vault that are there to make money off the back of us all as the DC community.
I'm in for the competition and I like to "try" to understand the science in the projects I work on.

alan2308
7th July 2009, 01:26 AM
We're doing all the work and footing pretty much all the bill, so what's in it for us? When they profit from the data, its a business and that's how we should be looking at it. I don't go in to work every morning because I really like the product that the company is producing.

Rusty
7th July 2009, 02:16 AM
I have read the replies and once again I am excited that finally we have people join the convo'.. Awesome work peeps.

So it seems that not many people care to have pure commercial projects introduced to the Vault, given the fact we work for "free" processing units for someone else to make money.

I did see a few people thinking that half the projects would fall under the "commercial" banner.

As I see it a commercial project would be for profit.
Projects that gain financial benefits from donations, grants etc, etc are not commercial.

Are these 2 types under the same banner?

Has the project been registered for business purposes?
Is the project connected with or engaged in or sponsored by or used in commerce or commercial enterprises?

Would you still crunch F@H, SETi, D2oL, TSC if they sold the work to someone and made money from your work?

Should we define "What Commercial IS first?
What is a Commercial project. Do we classify a project commercial if they receive regular donations to keep it running?
Do we classify a project a commercial project if they run a TV/paper/net ad? or have an interview and it is published?

Yankton
7th July 2009, 02:51 AM
I was wanting to clarify my post earlier when you put this out. I'm not against a company making money off of what we do, face it - any of the drug research companies will be looking to make a profit off of the results. I'm more interested in having the work that I donate be part of the public domain, so that OTHERS can benefit from it also, not just those running the project looking to make a buck. I have no doubt that what we accomplish can be very useful to a variety of different objectives. But mostly to sum it up, Public work ---> public output.

:kwsn:

Sport
7th July 2009, 04:57 AM
As I said...everyone has a cash flow from some where....BTW I did finally cast my positive vote

umccullough
7th July 2009, 07:15 AM
I vote yes because I frankly don't feel there's any sane way to define commercial vs. non-commercial when determining whether a project is eligible.

Most projects will end up being sponsored by an organization, university, or otherwise (and yes, universities are very much commercial).

The projects with some sort of commercial backing interest are more likely to remain viable over a longer term.

In the past, I wasn't very selective about which projects I crunched for, but these days I am more so (when power bills are hundreds of $ per month, one needs to reset priorities). What we really need is full disclosure - the vault should require projects provide up-front commercial information in order to be eligible, and make sure the DC-Vault users can locate and access this information.

Bio1ogics
7th July 2009, 07:53 AM
Definitely NO

Why would you need DC? Because you have too much to crunch yourself. If it's in your business model to crunch interesting data with the purpose to market something, you should invest in the hardware yourself. Furthermore, if I would crunch for a commercial project, I would expect some return; if the project would market something in part because of my efforts, i would feel taken advantage of.
Maybe a flawed analogy, but i wouldn't give some stranger on the street money, because he needs it for his company.

And I completely agree with Bold_Seeker; the Vault will quickly lose it's appeal, when some teams will not crunch on a commercial project.

Bio1ogics
7th July 2009, 08:18 AM
Oh, and being sponsored is not the issue; the manner in which the outcome of the project is used, is what counts.

opyrt
7th July 2009, 09:42 AM
As I've written before, I have no problems seeing the difference between a project that accepts donations to be able to keep running and projects that run to make a profit.

RC5 and GIMPS have given the crunchers payouts on special occasions and Majestic-12 will soon. I see no problem with this... These projects are clearly not in it for the money, they have a project goal they want to achieve. If we look at AQUA (I know this thread is not about AQUA, but it's a good example), their goal is to perfect their own Quantum Processor. A product they own and sell. Their "public results" will be a graph presenting how much better this version of the processor is in regards to the previous one. They are not funded by donations, but by investors. And investors do not put money into something unless they get money back.

With that clearified; My vote is no to commercial projects. Projects that receive donations and funding to keep running is fine.

Cow_tipping
7th July 2009, 12:43 PM
I also wouldnt like to see commercial projects being added to the Vault.
I don't like an extra moral dilemma besides the one that i have choosing between useless and useful projects that are in the Vault already. (no, i wont give examples ;) )

DigiK-oz
7th July 2009, 01:48 PM
I voted NO, for reasons already in this thread. I do not like to use my system, and pay for it's energy bill, if the project earns somebody else money.

Now what IS a commercial project is a good question, however it only becomes a real question if we decide to rule out commercial projects. So let's wait for the outcome of this poll :-)

In my opinion, any project actually being run and maintained by a commercial company is very "suspect" to being a commercial project at least. Projects run by universities, which are almost always sponsored in some way, are different in that the projects' results will be publicly available and so will benefit all.

I realize that there might be a thin line here. But currently, being non-commercial is not a requirement for vault inclusion. If it is, we can judge individual projects by that rule, whereas currently we basically can't (and do not need to).

Also, usually before a project is included, the users are asked their opinion about it. The project is judged on availability of work, responses of the admins and the other rules for inclusion. This will be just another rule for inclusion, on which users can either vote yes or no. Looking at the aqua discussion, many replies were (completely correct) in some form of "being non-commercial is not a requirement, so include it". If it is made a requirement, at least a NO vote for a certain project would be "legitimate".

SazanEyes
7th July 2009, 03:51 PM
I'd like to see a clear definition of "commercial" before I cast a vote. It seems there are a couple possible definitions:

1. a project that will not make the results available in the public domain
2. a project that may release the results, but the results will be used to develop a for-profit product
3. a project that is run by a for-profit company and/or funded by investors expecting a return on investment

I agree that a project matching definition 1 would make me uncomfortable. I don't really have a problem with definition 3, because ultimately everyone wants to be successful (make money) or else they won't be able to pay the bills. The for-profit vs. non-profit/university categories are mainly bookkeeping. Definition 2 is more of a gray area.

Whatever is decided, I'm involved with the DC Vault because I want my team to be #1, so I'll crunch any project that will help my team get there.

Yankton
7th July 2009, 04:59 PM
I agree. I am content as long as the results are released.

alexc
7th July 2009, 05:45 PM
Hi all,

I did not vote either way since I am the project leader of Majestic-12 Distributed Search Engine, however I wanted to do a post here this is a rather important topic that concerns us.

I am really up to my neck with stuff that needs to be done for the project, but thinking from point of view whether I'd personally take part in any project that is even vaguely commercial, then I'd look for the following conditions to be satisfied:

1) the project should be totally open about commercial side of it - this should not be done behind people's backs

2) commercial part of the project should be necessary for the project to survive and grow towards its stated objectives (otherwise it closes down)

3) profits from commercial usage should be shared with participants - not just in form of some upfront cash money for processing, but in form of shares that would reward them for effectively helping to build that company up

I could probably think of more, but I think those 3 are probably the most important ones, I am glad to say that our project in my view wholly satisfies those 3 conditions :)

----

Just another thought here - there is little easy in trying any distributed project as by definition the task it tries to solve is hard enough to require more resources, but some projects are a bit easier than others - pigging back on BOINC infrastructure rather than developing your own, and also not needing massive processing capacity centrally (this requires money), and also any project that requires full time efforts and runs over long period of times (almost 5 years for us) would be pretty much impossible to do without some serious money.

The question is therefore how to get money - some are lucky to be in universities and they can get grants, others like SETI@home have capacity to raise money but even they have problems - anyone who is out of this framework will have very hard time surviving yet alone trying to accomplish something very difficult.

So, I do appreciate generally negative sentiment against "commercial" projects, but I think it would be worthwhile to keep some of my points in mind - if it's a "get-rich-quick-on-contribution-of-others" scheme, then I'd share negative feelings 100%, however if it's something worth supporting and displays consistently good attitude towards contributors then I think such projects are worth supporting :)

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

Maybe the poll should be changed to: "Should commercial projects be individualy voted on for acceptance to the DC-Vault?" I am pretty sure in this case 90%+ votes will be for Yes and then projects can be judged on their own merits.

cheers

Alex

Rusty
8th July 2009, 03:25 AM
-----------
Maybe the poll should be changed to: "Should commercial projects be individualy voted on for acceptance to the DC-Vault?" I am pretty sure in this case 90%+ votes will be for Yes and then projects can be judged on their own merits.

cheers

Alex

Alex - All project before going into the Vault have a thread made and in that time people have their time to say what they want to say about the project. But yes I think from now on we will make them polls. Only problem is, not many people post their concerns when a project is up for addition to the Vault

Thanks for your Posts all.. Seems this is getting more and more confusing the longer we post about it.


Should we define "What Commercial IS first?
What is a Commercial project. Do we classify a project commercial if they receive regular donations to keep it running?
Do we classify a project a commercial project if they run a TV/paper/net ad? or have an interview and it is published?

Seems like we need to clarify what we(as a DC community) see as a commercial project.

My veiw.

If a project/company has been setup to "find a drug" or win a "competition" to find the largest prime etc etc and make cold hard cash/profit, the returned results are kept for themselves and are not available to the "public", then this is commercial venture.

If a project seeks out funding from donations/grants or whatever and do not make a "huge" profit, to assist in the running costs of the said project, then this is a non-for-profit project.

Beyond
9th July 2009, 08:21 PM
I voted yes but with some reservations. I'd like to see the results of commercial ventures provided openly. I'm also more interested in the advancement of human knowledge than in whether an endeavor is commercial or not. A problem is that commercial is hard to define. At universities, discoveries are often patented and then the fruit of our work goes into their coffers. Is that commercial? Sounds like it to me. Everything needs to get paid for. This proposed rule just seems like another excuse for nitpicking arguments and attempts at Vault manipulation. I'm against manipulation.

leavitron
9th July 2009, 09:12 PM
I have not voted because I haven't really seen a satisfactory, viable definition of commercial. I know Rusty posted one, but to me that appeared to be his personal definition. IMO, the admins of DC-V need to come up with a solid definition and then and only then will this vote really, truly matter.

Beyond
9th July 2009, 09:38 PM
I have not voted because I haven't really seen a satisfactory, viable definition of commercial. I know Rusty posted one, but to me that appeared to be his personal definition. IMO, the admins of DC-V need to come up with a solid definition and then and only then will this vote really, truly matter.
Good suggestion. I'd like to see this up for discussion too. To me the real importance is whether the results are freely available to anyone who asks, "commercial" or not.

whizbang
9th July 2009, 09:41 PM
It isn't just a thin line separating commercial and non-commercial projects: it's a hazy gray cloud. Any project should have its full intentions, funding, and findings made fully available. As long as those goals are met, I have no problem with any project, in the Vault or otherwise. My vote then would be yes, allow commercial projects in the Vault, but with the above reservations.

Accs
12th July 2009, 08:01 AM
As I see it a commercial project would be for profit.
Projects that gain financial benefits from donations, grants etc, etc are not commercial.

Should we define "What Commercial IS first?
What is a Commercial project. Do we classify a project commercial if they receive regular donations to keep it running?
Do we classify a project a commercial project if they run a TV/paper/net ad? or have an interview and it is published?
I can agree with your initial definitions, if we clarify the profit portion. I believe a project is commercial if the people running the project intend to make a profit selling (or otherwise distributing) the results. I believe intent is the key issue here. Public release of the results can be considered to be a reasonable indication that the intent isn't primarily profit.

By this definition, FAH doesn't qualify as commercial, even though the drug companies could (and do) profit from the results. I believe that this is valid, as the project results are openly available, and not limited to a single consumer. There are a ton of other projects that are pure research, and are funded by various Universities or Governments. The funding that paid for the servers and labor to create & maintain the project were not intended to create profit for the funding agencies, or the project. Although there is income involved, the profit here is minimal, and I would consider projects like this to be non-commercial.

As another example, M-12 IS commercial by this definition, and I believe that too is valid. The people running that project intend to make a profit from the results, and will not make the accumulated search data openly available. Alexc commented that he had a lot of work to be done for the project. So what. The goal of the project is to make him, and his investors, a pile of money (think Google). This is definitely commercial, and has no place in something like the DC-Vault. It needs to go the way of MoneyBee (another blatantly commercial project).

Advertising for donations isn't commercial. Advertising for donations far in excess of what's required to run the project is.

I voted NO because your definition was VERY close to mine, and was one I could accept.

opyrt
12th July 2009, 12:00 PM
The goal of the project is to make him, and his investors, a pile of money (think Google).

You state this as a fact... please show us the source for this. If you are right, I totally agree that MJ12 should be removed. However, I doubt you are right.

Accs
12th July 2009, 05:07 PM
The goal of the project is to make him, and his investors, a pile of money (think Google).You state this as a fact... please show us the source for this. If you are right, I totally agree that MJ12 should be removed.My intent was to state this as a high probability. The example of Google was gives as a method for the profit (click-through ads), not as an example of ths size of the pile of money.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

alexc
12th July 2009, 05:32 PM
If I wanted to make money I'd definately do something else - probably programming apps for iPhone: much easier, and far more likely to turn up a profit :)

Our commercial side actually makes data publicly available - you can verify your site and get data for free: http://www.majesticseo.com - this search engine is public, it actually helps our project have better relationships with webmasters and providing them free alternative to Google.

Google earns money by having ads - we don't do that and we can't do that because it requires first to build highly competitive search engine to gain real user traffic.

While MJ12 may end up making a profit (right now all revenues are reinvested into hardware and R&D) due to the fact that we allocated substantial number of shares to the entity (Distributed Computing Partners) that will be owned by project members it means that effectively they became shareholders: I don't think there is any other distributed project that does something like it.

I appreciate that our project won't satisfy everyone - I don't know what I could do better than what I've done so far: Google has got 1000 times more resources than us in pretty much every aspect, we are already handicapped in a very big way.

Sport
12th July 2009, 07:47 PM
If I wanted to make money I'd definately do something else - probably programming apps for iPhone: much easier, and far more likely to turn up a profit :)

Our commercial side actually makes data publicly available - you can verify your site and get data for free: http://www.majesticseo.com - this search engine is public, it actually helps our project have better relationships with webmasters and providing them free alternative to Google.

Google earns money by having ads - we don't do that and we can't do that because it requires first to build highly competitive search engine to gain real user traffic.

While MJ12 may end up making a profit (right now all revenues are reinvested into hardware and R&D) due to the fact that we allocated substantial number of shares to the entity (Distributed Computing Partners) that will be owned by project members it means that effectively they became shareholders: I don't think there is any other distributed project that does something like it.

I appreciate that our project won't satisfy everyone - I don't know what I could do better than what I've done so far: Google has got 1000 times more resources than us in pretty much every aspect, we are already handicapped in a very big way.

Alex;
I'm not sure I have the bandwidth to support you and yours personally (with the # of machines running the # of projects/WU's , I have running on a single IP). As for myself, I appreciate your candor ....should Majestic come under fire you can be assured I'll fight for you. You've made a public declaration and announcement, you are statesman enough to address us on our own turf; for these things I salute you and will support your endeavor as best I can...

Sport... Admin@ DC-Vault....Admin&founder@ SeriousCrunchers (http://seriouscrunchers.net)

alexc
12th July 2009, 08:07 PM
Much appreciated! :)

I understand general sentiment against purely commercial projects - especially when they hide information or just want to get a free ride basically, I would not have liked to run such project myself and I feel that we found the right balance (if not a solution) to a very difficult problem. Life unfortunately is not perfect - people have to earn their living, and for myself I did not want to do things that would distract me from the project.

I am very happy that right now the course of action that we took (and this was discussed in great detail with the members of the project - lots of threads on our forum), is not only helping us develop further rather than shut down but also we are pioneering new model whereby people who helped make the project reality benefit in form of shareholding - they become real partners in it, not just "cheap resource" as some other companies might view it :)

Sport
12th July 2009, 08:21 PM
well stated..again you have my support, for what little it is worth

Just the fact that you are willing to acknowledge those of us in the trenches....means a lot to us

Ars-outlnder
12th July 2009, 10:12 PM
While MJ12 may end up making a profit (right now all revenues are reinvested into hardware and R&D) due to the fact that we allocated substantial number of shares to the entity (Distributed Computing Partners) that will be owned by project members it means that effectively they became shareholders: I don't think there is any other distributed project that does something like it.


So how many shares do I have??

http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?page=user&proj=maj&name=1014

alexc
13th July 2009, 12:20 AM
So how many shares do I have??

http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?page=user&proj=maj&name=1014

Here is more information on mechanics how it will work:

http://www.majestic12.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3484

Actual formulae on how shares will be split among members is yet to be approved by community, here is relevant thread:

http://www.majestic12.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3590

So, I can't tell you right now how big your piece of pie will be, but looking at 250 mln urls you crawled I think it won't be small :)

cswchan
13th July 2009, 01:05 AM
So how many shares do I have??

http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?page=user&proj=maj&name=1014


That should mean i have more shares than you... :p

Just kidding outlnder... :D

http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?page=user&proj=maj&name=640

:bateyes:

Sport
13th July 2009, 02:49 AM
That should mean i have more shares than you... :p

Just kidding outlnder... :D

http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?page=user&proj=maj&name=640

:bateyes:
I just looked at those stats..."HOLYSH#T"!!!! I am impressed,and honored to call you a friend

cswchan
13th July 2009, 04:23 AM
I just looked at those stats..."HOLYSH#T"!!!! I am impressed,and honored to call you a friend

You should take a look at pwguru's scores if you're impressed by mine...

http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?page=team&proj=maj&team=154

:o

KAMCOBILL
13th July 2009, 05:25 AM
I couldn't resist :D http://www.majestic12.co.uk/projects/dsearch/userinfo.php?id=432 WOW:rolleyes:

Rusty
13th July 2009, 05:32 AM
OK this thread went off topic really quick..

Seems there is no clear case of what IS or ISNT a commercial project.. And I don't think we all combined could clearly define what is or isnt a commercial project.

So....

Until we can actually nail down what commercial means the Vault will remain open to any project that meets the requirements.

Beyond
13th July 2009, 08:34 AM
To muddy the waters of the commercial question even more, here's a statement from the Aqua project admin/developer today:

> By the way, I wouldn't call AQUA commercial, since we're not making any
> money off of this. We're researching quantum simulation techniques and the
> median scaling of quantum algorithms. Work has been started on the first
> paper reporting the results so far (8 to 240 qubits), comparing quantum
> computer scaling to classical computer scaling. My guess is that there will
> be more papers to come on this too, since from discussions, it sounded like
> there was way more to report than would suit a single paper.

http://aqua.dwavesys.com/forum_thread.php?id=225&nowrap=true#2923

KAMCOBILL
13th July 2009, 09:57 PM
OK this thread went off topic really quick..

Seems there is no clear case of what IS or ISNT a commercial project.. And I don't think we all combined could clearly define what is or isnt a commercial project.

So....

Until we can actually nail down what commercial means the Vault will remain open to any project that meets the requirements.

Second that motion. It's the best soulution.

Sport
14th July 2009, 01:43 AM
This should start a BIG fight

....how 'bout entering a category for commercial, right along side Physical Science, Bio, Math, and Misc

....ducking and running!!!!!!

Rusty
14th July 2009, 01:53 AM
http://fc08.deviantart.com/images3/i/2004/168/c/8/_smack_.gif

cswchan
14th July 2009, 03:06 AM
http://fc08.deviantart.com/images3/i/2004/168/c/8/_smack_.gif


:eek: :D

Sport
14th July 2009, 03:46 AM
http://fc08.deviantart.com/images3/i/2004/168/c/8/_smack_.gif

so maybe that wasn't such a good idea

Rusty
14th July 2009, 03:48 AM
LOL... Just joking

PhastPhred
15th July 2009, 03:24 AM
No - To paraphrase an old movie, sorta...

'It's my P.C. and I'll do with it what ever I want!'

But I'm not paying my electric bill to line the pockets of some Corporate DeepPocket!

umccullough
15th July 2009, 05:18 AM
But I'm not paying my electric bill to line the pockets of some Corporate DeepPocket!

And, why would having a project in the vault force you to? :)

This is where I'm really confused - I guess it's kinda like TV - if you don't like the channel, change it... but don't insist that it must be removed from the channel lineup just because you don't like it.

Nobody forces you to crunch every project in the Vault - granted, I still believe that a commercial project should be designated as such to help people determine which are/aren't of a commercial nature.

Xaverius
15th July 2009, 09:52 AM
There are people who don't like to participate in commercial projects and they can't get a good score on that project so they are lower in the vault-stats. Maybe it's a bit off in comparison but we're here for the stats but if a cyclist uses doping to get a good result in the tour de france the cyclists who don't use it are set back and it's not a fair competition.

Why not give everybody a fair chance in the DC-vault in stead of dividing the crunchers, let us unite and find a solution so non-commercial crunchers and commercial crunchers can still compare their stats fairly.

Offtopic: it's kinda hard to translate metaphores in english... :X

Beyond
15th July 2009, 03:02 PM
There are people who don't like to participate in commercial projects and they can't get a good score on that project
A lot of people won't run Math projects. Should we ban those for the same reason?
Whole countries have poor internet connectivity. Should we ban Comm projects?
The list could go on and on...

umccullough
15th July 2009, 06:57 PM
Why not give everybody a fair chance in the DC-vault in stead of dividing the crunchers, let us unite and find a solution so non-commercial crunchers and commercial crunchers can still compare their stats fairly.

And what if I claimed that I can't/won't run any project that uses a Windows-only client?

What about projects that require an nVidia graphics card? I don't support nVidia as a company, so I refuse to buy their products - I almost consider that to be a commercial project...

Where do you draw the line? When is there a compromise? Who makes the final decision?

Xaverius
16th July 2009, 09:29 PM
A lot of people won't run Math projects. Should we ban those for the same reason?
Whole countries have poor internet connectivity. Should we ban Comm projects?
The list could go on and on...
And what if I claimed that I can't/won't run any project that uses a Windows-only client?

What about projects that require an nVidia graphics card? I don't support nVidia as a company, so I refuse to buy their products - I almost consider that to be a commercial project...

Where do you draw the line? When is there a compromise? Who makes the final decision?
Guys guys guys, you're hurting me over here. Why is it that it seems to be impossible to make a remark and get a normal response. Why is it so hard to try to get an understanding here instead of bashing every opinion that is not yours...

I also rearly compete in math-projects and my graphic card is Nvidia but it's a 7900 so I can't use it for DC. So there you have it, should I vote NO now for those projects. Also, I run on AMD only. Should I vote no for every project where intel has an advantage? (that will be at almost any project now I presume) Personally, I would find it only fair that graphic card projects should run on ATI and Nvidia to be accepted but I really don't even wanna touch that subject because every time I make a post I only get negative response. Why do I even bother, why? Is it so hard to even see that everybody is entitled of their own opinion?

It is very easy to give your comments, I dare you to think with me instead of only making negative comments. See that your opinion is not the only one in de DC-world.

And I hope that I won't get only negative reactions on my post. :grouphug:

umccullough
16th July 2009, 09:58 PM
It is very easy to give your comments, I dare you to think with me instead of only making negative comments. See that your opinion is not the only one in de DC-world.

I'm not making negative comments for the sake of being negative.

I'm making comments that extend out this "some people don't like commercial projects" concept to point out how ridiculous it is to try and define commercial.

Furthermore, using the excuse: "some people can't get points for commercial projects" is a non-starter. Of course they can, nothing is preventing them from doing so except their own decisions.

Beyond
16th July 2009, 10:25 PM
Sorry http://www.team-ninja.com/vbulletin/images/avatars/yoda.gif (http://www.team-ninja.com/vbulletin/member.php?u=3262) Xaverius (http://www.team-ninja.com/vbulletin/member.php?u=3262), I wasn't trying to be unduly negative except to the extent that I don't agree. I was just pointing out that some people not wanting to participate in a project for whatever reason is a troublesome road to follow when choosing projects. For instance I'm not personally fond of Comm projects because I live in an area with narrow bandwidth and a dictatorial ISP. That doesn't mean that I want Comm projects baned, they just don't work for me. Other people have other problems and preferences. I think the Vault rules should be as simple as possible. Complexity breeds the chance of manipulation and that causes all kind of problems.

I personally LIKE your posts very much. but that doesn't mean I will always agree. When I don't I'll probably say so. Please don't take it as an attack.

I sure don't want to be on the wrong side of Yoda, he has the Force with him!