[RC5] keyrate stabilizing?

Zorba the Hutt zorbathut at uswest.net
Mon Oct 15 17:21:27 EDT 2001

well, at least *someone's* replying :) Thanks Bruce - it *is* nice to know
that someone's listening to us. Regular status updates would be nicer ;) but
I'm not going to push it.

For now, at least, you've still got my cycles . . . just, if you need to
rattle anybody's cage, you've got my full support. It's really frustrating
to not know what's going on as a user (in fact, while writing this I
realized I've been neglecting my sourceforge project for a week or two - not
that I have any fans yet - so I went and posted an explanatory note saying
I'd been caught up in midterms. These kind of things are important.)

Thanks again for the reply ~~


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Wilson" <bwilson at distributed.net>
To: <rc5 at lists.distributed.net>
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 7:12 PM
Subject: RE: [RC5] keyrate stabilizing?

> | > We should be well into 2nd pass of OGR-25 by now.
> | > Could we please have an update like that again? daa?
> | bwilson? anybody?
> | >
> |
> | Even better, why can't we put it on the stats page to be automatically
> | updated? I mean, the calculations really aren't hard :)
> It's not a question of calculations, it's a question of the volume of
> data.
> Every returned stub is stored as a line of text, occupying (perhaps) 50
> bytes.  That's probably low, but it makes calculation easier.
> In order to give accurate counts, we currently have to reload all the
> logs since the start of the OGR-(N) project into a database, figure out
> which ID first turned in a stub (pass 1), then figure out if anyone else
> turned in that same stub (pass 2), and if so, did they return the same
> nodecount.
> Along the way, we have to take into account retirements.  Any two
> participants who are related by retirement are considered to be the same
> ID.  This means up to 11 emails have to be checked against the person
> who first submitted the record.
> We have received a ton of duplicate work on OGR.  Apparently, some
> people think they can get stats credit for submitting the same work more
> than once.  At least temporarily, this is so.  When we discover someone
> is doing this, we usually just take them out of stats completely, the
> same as if they were installing trojans, or had made unauthorized
> installs.
> Duplicate or not, we still have to sift through all that work to find
> out what work has or hasn't been processed.  We have gigabytes of data
> to be processed, and it's not currently automated.  We have a script,
> but it's a human script, not a shell script.
> I'm not aware of what has been happening internally lately, so I can't
> give you a status update on OGR-25 progress stats.  I remember Daa
> saying back in August he might have time in October.
> Someone on this thread commented that we (d.net staff) aren't doing
> enough to push the project forward.  Mea culpa.  I have debated recently
> whether I would be better off taking my name off the list (thereby not
> implying that I am actively involved when I'm not), or staying on to
> avoid the "sky is falling" predictions, but still catching the blame.
> It's discouraging even to me how little progress is visible to the
> outside, and how long it takes to get anywhere.  I truly believe we
> could be going great places, but I can't do it alone, and I can't force
> anyone else to do anything at all.
> I do know some client development is in progress, specifically on some
> corrections to OGR.  I also know that we are acutely aware that "whoops,
> we're starting over" is an unacceptable answer on so many levels.  Yes,
> there are some bugs in the OGR core.  Yes, we're working on a
> correction.  Yes, we expect to save all valid work.  We're not sure how
> much of it will be valid, but indications point to saving nearly all of
> it.  That's as specific as I can get - ask a coder for more detail.
> And yes, stats are overdue for an update.  (It has nothing to do with
> knowing or not knowing how many nodes there are - we have been reporting
> progress as [stubs accurately completed]/[total stubs] basically
> forever).
> I read every message on this list, and it really is discouraging
> sometimes how easily people jump to a conspiracy theory.  We're not a
> corporation (though we are incorporated), we don't gain anything by the
> success of RC5-64 or OGR-(N) (except the good press to support a new
> project), we don't have any agendas that aren't clearly articulated on
> our website.  We're just a group of guys who believe in distributed
> computing, and who want to make it work.  We all wish we could do more.
> __
> Bruce Wilson <bwilson at distributed.net>
> PGP KeyID: 5430B995, http://www.toomuchblue.com/
> "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur."
> (Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.)
> --
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

More information about the rc5 mailing list