Originally Posted by kitchen
The article wrongly suggests (in its first paragraph and I think somewhere else as well) that only those with an \"always-on\" Internet connection can participate in the distributed protein-folding project. According to the folding@home FAQ (at http://folding.stanford.edu/faq.html), the console version of the folding client *is* compatible with dial-up modems. The article needs to be corrected so that readers without broadband connections won\'t be discouraged from participating. (I have a 56K modem and am a successful \"folder\".)

From the latest (11/11/02) version of the FAQ:

I have a modem, can I use Folding@ home?
Yes. It can be configured to dial up automatically, or wait until you connect. There may be some problems with modems and the screen saver version. If you are experiencing any, please use the console version of Folding@Home.

I used to fold 24/7 when I first got DSL.

Then I noticed that folding seemed to be using an inordinate amount of 'idle' bandwidth. If I started to do anything (even just moving the mouse), the bandwidth would quickly wind back to 0 k/s, leave it for a while, and it would ramp back up to 20-30kB/s.

The downloading wasn't constant, but I watched over 60MB come down in one hour one afternoon.

Either I had a trojan, or F@H really likes downloading something, because after I removed it, I had no more extraneous downloads occuring (yes XP's background data transfer service and auto-updating was disabled).

Any chance of a quick follow up showing data transferred by the client? Per WU perhaps, with some indication of how long it takes for a CPU of xxx MHz to complete a WU.

WRT gaming, at times the gameplay would 'stutter', even though average frame rates stayed high, this stutter was very annoying, making gaming unenjoyable.

I think income tax is reprehensible. However Government has toi have _some_ way of getting money from the constituents to spread around for services (police/health/education etc).
Possibly something based on personal spending rather than income tax could even out the majority poor and minority rich. IANA Accountant. I live Sown Under, we have both income tax and a Goods and Sales tax. Too many I think.

yeah. taxes are definitely necessary for public goods.

That's a whoopsie on AG102 :-)

Stupid buttons,
IntelMole

I didn't...

If you want it in economics terms, then fine. I just thought capitalism was a better way of approaching the subject...

Say you lived on an island that was freqently flooded (UK :-) and there was an agreement to build a sea wall to protect your livelihood. That sea wall is a public good. If you left it to [b]the market mechanism[/b], that wall would never get built and maintained (spelling?). One person could not build his section and benefit from everyone else, so therefore could everyone else

Happy now?

Whereas, if the Government plans a way of doing this, then it will get built properly (unless you live in the UK).

Aaaah years of crappy public busses have left me jaded,
IntelMole

I didn't...

If you want it in economics terms, then fine. I just thought capitalism was a better way of approaching the subject...

[quote]Say you lived on an island that was freqently flooded (UK :-) and there was an agreement to build a sea wall to protect your livelihood. That sea wall is a public good. If you left it to capitalism, that wall would never get built and maintained (spelling?). One person could not build his section and benefit from everyone else, so therefore could everyone else.[/quote]Capitalism isn't a form of government. Don't confuse the two.

Erm... hi :-)

Yep, from the good old UK :-)

Anyways, I don't know much about your system no, I was just giving my theoretical beliefs...

Taxes are good :-)

Say you lived on an island that was freqently flooded (UK :-) and there was an agreement to build a sea wall to protect your livelihood. That sea wall is a public good. If you left it to capitalism, that wall would never get built and maintained (spelling?). One person could not build his section and benefit from everyone else, so therefore could everyone else.

OTOH, if a sea wall tax was introduced, everyone would have a sea wall...

Other public goods include the military, police etc.

"If people want more investment in health, let them spend their own money. They are never entitled to spend mine. I can't afford their spending my money, and have the right to every last unit of payment for my work."

Reverse the situation. You need to pay for health, but you don't have the money. Health is another public good. One person doesn't hurt anything if he doesn't get his vaccination, or doesn't pay for investment, but the community as a whole must agree to pay for it.

Oh, and Ragnar Dan#99, that's because your body gets used to the lie in and starts shutting down bodily functions, making you feel more tired. It's not hibernating, but it's apparently quite close...

Just something I heard,
IntelMole

Like me, I think you need to get more sleep. ;-)

This broadband, tech. site, practically anything recent and quite a bit from the past ready and waiting for you, thing... it can make you hurt yourself.

I'm a few hundred hours of sleep shy, and for some reason not catching upeven when I sleep in on Saturday.

nevermind, i realized that its the first 10 amendments of the constituation just after i posted that last post. i was thinking of an older document written before the constitution (maybe declaration of independence) lol.

pic = pick

A document. An essay. Take your pic. But the Bill of Rights is NOT law.

If it's not law, then what do you call it?

[quote](even though the amendment to allow it violates the Bill of Rights and was never ratified, it was fraudulently done by 2 states having passed different versions, but that's another argument) [/quote]Bill of Rights != Law

My point is that amendment 16 was never ratified. 3/4 of the states have to ratify an amendment for it to be valid. They did not do that. But the Secretary of State at the time just asserted that it was ratified, and everyone in Washington, DC was so greedy for our right to exist that they yelled, "Hooray!" and wrote an income tax law.

Anyway, this is a thing you'll have to read about in order to consider it plausible. There was a book written a few years ago by an IRS agent which showed it to be true, and then someone even went to court, I think in Kentucky (one of the 2 states which didn't ratify the submitted amendment as worded, the other being Connecticut), but I never heard what happened with that. I imagine the federal judge said, in effect, "Go away," and threw out the case. I can't remember the name of the book off hand, but I heard him talking about it on something, somewhere, and somewhere I have a PDF showing various things... but you'll have to look into it yourself if you're interested. I just repeat it because I'm sickened at how quickly we've fallen from the way this country is supposed to work.

[quote]Oh, and income tax is IMHO very constitutiona/quote]

Section 8 of the constitution:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

Section 9 of the constitution:
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

Amendment XVI (1913)
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

So, yes, technically an income tax is now "constitutional" because Congress passed an amendment. However, it was not intended by the writers of the Constitution. How that money is being used far exceeds the intention of the constitution: "to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States".

It is rather interesting to go back and actually read the Constitution as an adult -- rather than as an assignment in Civics class. You'd be surprised at how many unconstitutional activities are routine.

Just for fun, guess when term limits first started being imposed? Or when salary changes for representatives could be applied during their own terms?

IntelMole,

I think you're from the UK so perhaps you are not fully aware of the United States' system. We had police, and crime lower than you have in your nation, before we had the income tax, which we got from the Federal government (even though the amendment to allow it violates the Bill of Rights and was never ratified, it was fraudulently done by 2 states having passed different versions, but that's another argument) in 1913, we were doing fine. Our crime rate had been falling since a bit after the war ended in 1865, and continued falling until 1961 when it began a general climb for the first time in our history. After wars, when young men come back and often decide on crime since in wars they get away with quite a bit, the crime rate often climbs for a short period, but it comes back down.

There is one main reason for the income tax, and that's to provide a certain type of politicians with victims to exploit for his power. When the income tax was passed in 1913, they promised up and down that "only the rich" would pay, and "it will never rise past 1%!" Well, now everyone pays, and no one pays that little. Most income tax money is spent on social programs to buy votes and weaken the integrity, honor, and life-prospects of citizens (who are now actually subjects), and on other unlawful (in the U.S.) ideas like foreign aide, foreign military adventures and installations, and regulation of life by rules written by the Executive branch of government, even though all legislative authority is supposed to be vested in our Congress, and their granted powers are supposed to be extremely limited.

If people want more investment in health, let them spend their own money. They are never entitled to spend mine. I can't afford their spending my money, and have the right to every last unit of payment for my work.

In my view, government should be a vector for public demand. Just as in business if more people buy your product, then you produce more of that product, if people ask for more investment in health, then this should be reflected in the next budget.

Oh, and income tax is IMHO very constitutional, it provides you with things you would otherwise not have e.g. police (google for a site called "amosweb economic glossarama" (can't remember the web address) and look under "public goods")

And #86, thanks, but when it comes to women, isn't more usually better? :-),
IntelMole

Efficient government is the tyrant's siren.

What is desirable is minimal government. That accomplishes the well-intended goal of those wanting efficiency, while protecting the rights of the population being governed.

#87

I agree.

Political officials should be almost like soldiers, who fight on the political front.

The military is efficient and effective. Perhaps if the government were more like the military, it too would be efficient and effective.

Perhaps a military government is in order.

Money lures most politicians.

Perhaps a lack of it would only draw those interested in the best interests of the people.

I can't agree that writing a letter asking MY representative in MY government to direct MY money paid via taxation is unconstitutional.

Of course, I don't believe an income tax is constitutional to begin with. Nor do I believe political officials should receive more than minimum wage for SERVING their country.

#80: Arguing that someone should write a letter telling a legislator to violate his oath of office is an obscenity.

As much as you may want money to be spent on research, you have no right to ask for money to be stolen by a legislator or his agents for that purpose.

You may think you have that power, and evidently that power is thought to exist by legislators in every country. But it is not just, and in the United States it is unquestionably a violation of the powers granted to the federal government, and after the 14th amendment was passed the state governments as well.

Give your own money. Ask someone with wealth to give his money. Ask a corporation to donate cycles or money - they love doing that stuff, by the way, and I think this particular project could benefit immensely from such things, and I'm sure it is possible for accounting types to accurately determine the electrical and maintenance costs of folding during particular, down-time hours. That would be valuable for them because of taxation and deductions they might be able to make. (Though being strictly honest about it, that's something the Constitution doesn't really allow either.)

Anyway... I'm being a bit of a whiner here, considering I'm fighting a mostly-lost battle.

---

#85: Nice posts. It's the woman, though, not women. :-)

On a different note, the review:

Very original, much preferred to the next Athlon XP 2*00+ :-)

Very good. Well presented for such a boring conclusion. I wanted to hear that blood, sweat and tears were needed just to get the thing to run at half the speed of the non-F@H system, but no, in the end it's just the same with as without.

Erm, good prose, good use of full stops, commas, letters, and pretty pictures :-)

No pics of the women though :-),
IntelMole

Okay, let's see, so far we've got Government corruption, commercial corruption, erm... power leeching computers, bullshit, bullshit, and sativa...

(Sorry sativa :-P)

What F@H does:
Proteins fold. They are made this way and fold to make certain shapes. Enzymes are proteins, they speed up biological processes by the "Lock-and-key" method. They increase surface area, so the reaction is speeded up, same as if you increase the surface area of a CPU more heat can be dissipated.

(that's a fairly accurate analogy, considering how much I've thought about it before bringing it up, don't go beating it okay... just an analogy)

What happens if they fold "wrongly" though? I just studied a disease called Phenylketonuria briefly, caused by a genetic problem. The problem causes a different protein to be made, and the enzyme that's involves can't catalyse phenylalanine, so it builds up, causing brain growth to be retardated...

That's the sort of thing that happens when proteins fold "wrong." Although the example is slightly different (different protein not different fold sequence), the idea is pretty much the same...

But we know very little about how these proteins fold? F@H works out a 5ms timeslice of a protein fold, so we can piece together the whole thing when it's compiled back together.

Commercial greed my arse. Where?!?!?!?! Those of you who say it's pointless for this very reason, don't understand the project.

"We will never see the benefits...":

Billy. They recently folded a protein involved in AIDS, now considering how much we know about combating that disease, I'd call that pretty beneficial, wouldn't you?

AG58, kudos for having the right glasses on :-)
All the rest of you, learn how to get dressed first, then tackle more important issues...

I would run F@H myself, except I'm on dialup, and my machine chugs anyways... I lost an grandparent to cancer a while back, so yeah, I'd love to run the client...

And all those who whinge about the power consumption: loose a belt buckle hole or two FFS! I've seen looser corsets :-)

/rant,
IntelMole

#80 -- the funny part is that reaching into my pocket and making a donation takes checking out the charity thoroughly to ensure that more than 10% of my donation actually goes directly into the research.

Let's say I donated $15 per month rather than leaving my computer running (saving me $15 per month). How much do you think it would cost Stanford to purchase the computing power I would no longer be providing?

It's all a question of values.

If someone does not see a value in the end result of all the work units, then increased electricity bills and decreased performance are MAJOR concerns.

If someone does see a value in the end result of all the work units, then increased electricity bills and decreased performance are MINOR concerns.

Each individual has their own values. I do not value feeding someone in Africa, so all my parents' statements that my dinner could feed a family of 10 in Africa meant nothing.

Don't fold "because you should". Fold "because you want to" or even "because you need to".

[qess time debating copyright legislatio/q]No! That would just result in more stupid copyright legislation being passed! They need to debate it long enough to see the idiocy of it.

I really dont think running this proggie will help mankind that much. a better approach may be to reach into your pocket and make a donation, volunteer at a hospital/charity thing, or write a letter to your representatives urging more reasearch money and less time debating copyright legislation.

Ever notice the pause button on the F@H client, why dont you just pause the damn thing when gaming if you are so friggen worried about your little performance boost you get and shut up, run F@H AND DO SOMETHING FOR MAN KIND YOU HEATHENS.

I've noticed weird behavior running the F@H client too, not really performance issues, but its been with the graphical client, not the CLI version. I don't play UT, but several other games like to minimize themselves halfway through loading, like someone else mentioned, sometimes if folding is running. The crappy part is that a couple of games that do this hang when you try to maximize them again, so then I have to CTRL-SHIFT-ESC and end them, and try it again. A real pain esp. when it does it twice in a row. Also have a few weird slowdowns in games sometimes too with folding running, really noticeable in PGA 2002 golf, which is a pig and needs all the power you can muster I guess. Bottom line is that it ain't perfect, and since I'm stuck on dialup for a while I will stop running it. I'm guessing the problem is games aren't using 100% of the CPU all the time, so when folding tries to take up some of the idle cycles, because the CPU is switching tasks back and forth more cache misses and pipeline bubbles form. Benchmarking with timedemo is probably a bad way to test for this reason, since it will probably easily hog 100% CPU since its rendering as fast as possible and not realtime gameplay where depending what's happening the CPU may have a little free time, etc. Benchmarking 3d games has always irritated me because minimum fps are ignored in favour of average. Concievably one graphics card could average higher fps yet feel less smooth in real life because in intense graphical situations it slows down more than different card. The folding benmarks might even not show this kind of thing, just because with folding running the average is .3 less doesn't mean the minimum fps in some spots isn't far less, even if the drop is only for a half a second. And a human playing the game would most certainly notice.

Win2k SP2 or 3
Duron 1.1, 512mb PC133, GF3 Ti200.