Team Ninja Bulletin Board  

Go Back   Team Ninja Bulletin Board > DC Vault > New Projects

View Poll Results: Add to the Vault?
Yes 6 75.00%
No 2 25.00%
Voters: 8. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 5th October 2017, 02:42 PM
Coleslaw Coleslaw is offline
[H]ard|OCP
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: IL
Posts: 605
Well to be fair, it is also the technology that would highly benefit people fishing, underwater geology/geography, scoping out potential oil reserves in the ocean bed, general recreation, etc... However, nothing presented so far has suggested military application other than a user and a few agreeing for the info. The front page has since been updated and the admin stated clearly

Quote:
Briefly - we don't deal with military problems, our goal is to study ocean (its water and bottom)
Since there is a language barrier, I'm sure some would read that as meaning "for the time being". However, I personally do not. Does that mean the military couldn't utilize advantages from the science? Possibly. I'm sure every military does this regardless of the scientific intent.
__________________
[link=http://join.worldcommunitygrid.org?recruiterId=338542&tea mId=BP5XNJBR9N1][/link]
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 6th October 2017, 02:51 AM
Bill's Avatar
Bill Bill is offline
Ninja 生徒
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dallas TX, USA
Posts: 94
Concerns

Well we have some talented volunteers out there. I propose that those with concerns do some Bio searching on the Principals of the project looking for past military work or projects and or anything else that would sway people to be more concerned. If nothing is found then the Innocent until proven Guilty rule might fit.

Another option would be to pose a question to the Principals will the results be open sourced to the scientific community or are they being held for commercial development.

Thanks
Bill F
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 6th October 2017, 12:02 PM
Coleslaw Coleslaw is offline
[H]ard|OCP
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: IL
Posts: 605
One of the team members of the project also was part of Optima@home according to their bio pages.

Last edited by Coleslaw; 6th October 2017 at 12:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 9th October 2017, 01:24 AM
Bill's Avatar
Bill Bill is offline
Ninja 生徒
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dallas TX, USA
Posts: 94
Project Optima@home appears to be inactive at this time.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 9th October 2017, 01:51 AM
Coleslaw Coleslaw is offline
[H]ard|OCP
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: IL
Posts: 605
It has been for a while. That is why I said "was"...lol.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10th October 2017, 08:05 PM
Coleslaw Coleslaw is offline
[H]ard|OCP
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: IL
Posts: 605
Challenge is over. Things ran OK. Does anyone else have any concerns? Beyond, do you think at this time that this concern of yours needs addressed in some way further before they are included?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 13th October 2017, 12:21 PM
Coleslaw Coleslaw is offline
[H]ard|OCP
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: IL
Posts: 605
A teaser of the potential of a future GPU application. http://www.acousticsathome.ru/boinc/...d.php?id=28#88
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 14th October 2017, 01:59 AM
Bill's Avatar
Bill Bill is offline
Ninja 生徒
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dallas TX, USA
Posts: 94
Add project or Hold or Poll

Well the last concern raised was on Oct 5th and the project successfully handled a good challenge.

Do we hold and wait for other concerns or for additional information from those volunteers originally concerned ? Or should a Poll be started for inclusion in the Vault ?

Obviously any cruncher who does not feel comfortable can elect to not work the project.

Bill F
Dallas TX
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 14th October 2017, 03:49 AM
Rusty Rusty is offline
Owner
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 11,398
Poll added.
__________________
RUSTY


Team Ninja Forever : Once a Ninja, always a Ninja - Team Ninja

"I'm a SAS NINJA"

Drafted to the SAS
Dump of the day in Folding@Home   Dump of the week in Folding@Home   Dump of the month in Folding@Home  
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 14th October 2017, 04:04 PM
Beyond's Avatar
Beyond Beyond is offline
Ars Technica
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rum River
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coleslaw View Post
Beyond, do you think at this time that this concern of yours needs addressed in some way
Like the 3 people on the forum who expressed concern, I have no proof. Simply a gut feeling. Military ties for this project seem suspicious. Of course they would never admit it if there are. How would we have the resources to obtain proof? I doubt if we have any members from MI6 or the NSA. Vote as you like. I did.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 16th October 2017, 06:19 AM
Bill's Avatar
Bill Bill is offline
Ninja 生徒
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dallas TX, USA
Posts: 94
Open Access Scientific paper

Found on the Acoustics site a link to an open access paper on their results and what they are working on.

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...3/1/012022/pdf

Bill F
Dallas TX
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 24th October 2017, 07:12 PM
DigiK-oz DigiK-oz is offline
Dutch Power Cows
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: netherlands
Posts: 156
Hmm, I sincerely doubt the usefulness of a poll here, given the very limited amount of people active in the forum (I did not vote yet, since I am sort of neutral on this one).

I respect and share some of the doubts/objections people have. On the other hand, lots of projects have been added in the past because "they met all rules of the vault". Objections like a project being too commercial, not serving any real purpose, etc were all put aside with this reason. Now can someone tell me where this particular project violates vault rules?

We now have a "buffer" of I think 3 projects that are candidates for inclusion. Maybe the best approach would be to allow only 1 project to be added each quarter, and decide on a per-quarter base WHICH project will be added?

Then, for every new project that we find, we decide whether it meets vault rules (well defined). If it does, it is added to the "candidates" list. The top 3 oldest projects on the candidates list then become eligible for inclusion and shortly before a new quarter begins, we decide which of those 3 is added (through discussions, through a poll, or even by rolling a die ). This way, the list of vault projects becomes more stable (i.e. not 3 projects included in one month, and then 3 months nothing), and we prevent discussion as to whether a project may or may not be military or otherwise unwanted in nature as it will then probably be voted off in the discussion/poll.

If a project is removed because of it being finished or no longer meeting vault rules, we may or may not have an extra "inclusion discussion/poll" deciding which one of the 3 oldest candidates to replace the project that has been removed.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 25th October 2017, 02:54 PM
Coleslaw Coleslaw is offline
[H]ard|OCP
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: IL
Posts: 605
The reason I have been given is that the rules we have are merely to be eligible but does not guarantee inclusion. Ultimately it is up to owners final ruling but is highly influenced on what the verbal crowd decide is considered "fun" over all after becoming "eligible". If there is no voicing of such matters, then a project may squeak by uncontested. The reason for the poll is to get a better sense of solid yes or no rather than wish wash answers. I have refrained from voting at this time as I would really prefer it to be decided by non-admins first. Then admins deliberate which right now has very little activity outside myself. Then it is presented to Rusty (and any other owner that actually cares to step in) to ultimately take those suggestions. The more people that voice, the better. Unfortunately, not a lot of people are willing to create an account just to voice their opinion outside their own team forums.

I don't see a problem with adding 3 projects at once. I tend to support the projects whether in the DC-Vault or not. If a team limits their selection based on that, it is their choice to do so. However, it really isn't that hard to play catch up when you are one the top teams and it is a rather new project being added. One of the largest complaints I have heard about the design of DC-Vault is the stagnation. Early on it is easy to move up the ranks, but after all of the easy points have been obtained, it can take a year or more to move up a single spot. Adding new projects seems to bring renewed life and focus from teams that are still interested. The point system is extremely flawed as it is. For example, my team would gain a lot more ground by creating artificial teams at each project and then scoring points with just one work unit each. Thus making the point differential between positions so minute that it isn't worth pushing those projects. Look at SETI now. We have no incentive to put a lot of resources into it for little gain. We could put a fraction of the resources into SRBase or TN-Grid and make heaps more progress for the same resources. The less popular projects in this right become worth more to a team. But if someone were to screw with the system by making a bunch of worthless artificial teams, you could essentially have what you have with FAH. No real difference between 1st place and 10th place in the grand scheme of things....

Also, discussion of rules changes should actually be in its own thread. You will see I posed a similar request here: http://www.team-ninja.com/vbulletin/...ad.php?t=54436 and that was about 3 years ago. You will find that some of the practices we perform now are a result of those discussions. And example is... getting project admin approval (or at least attempting) before adding a project. That isn't in the rules here but was something I started as a courtesy and is now part of what Rusty wants done.

Last edited by Coleslaw; 25th October 2017 at 03:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 26th October 2017, 12:21 AM
Bill's Avatar
Bill Bill is offline
Ninja 生徒
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dallas TX, USA
Posts: 94
Yeah for discussion

The last two tread segments have been more simulating than the whole length or the tread prior to them.

Congratulations to both of you for dusting off the grey matter and giving those few of us looking at the Forum some things to ponder.

Bill F
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 26th October 2017, 08:07 AM
DigiK-oz DigiK-oz is offline
Dutch Power Cows
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: netherlands
Posts: 156
OK, back on-topic then. I voted Yes for this one. I share some of the objections regarding possible military use, but I think there are very many projects that could be used for wrong reasons - basically any science can be used for the wrong purpose. And I think that if the russian (or any) government would want to find out more about acoustics in water (sonar) they could throw a supercomputer at that for much quicker results, and with less effort. So, a yes from me.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.