Please move distributed computing discussions to comp.distributed

"Ed" wrote in message
.254...
"Stratcat" wrote in
m:

Not sure what your implying here. Tempaerature cycling is exactly what
will SHORTEN an electronics device's life. It's better to run
electronics in a steady state environment, within thier specs.

Electro-mechanical devices may last longer due to thier mechanical
nature, but in general, a great deal of stress occurs during the
temperature cycling phases, and the in-rush of currents that occur
when a device powers up.

Yep. There is a fire house, maybe in NJ, that had a light bulb that
Edison built still burning into at least the 90's. Don't know if it is
still working, but they never turned it off.

The trade off with PCs has always been power usage vs. the life of SOME
parts. If you keep a disk drive running all of the time, it will
probably fail sooner then if you powered the machine off. Bottom line is
that the failure issues for computers are not as simple as many people
think.

Man, I don't know what was goin' on w/me last night. First, I
misunderstood Matt's post concerning pwr cycling, and now I
completely typo'd, by missing a 'NOT'!

The above should've read:

[...] Electro-mechanical devices may *NOT* last longer [...]

Yeeshhh.

Think I got brain-drain trying to put the cpu pwr equations into
a keyboard friendly form.

Yeah, the non-mechanical electronics, if correctly designed, and
run w/i spec, including temp specs & good clean pwr specs, should
last pretty much forever. Well, at least for a very long time.

It's the electro-mechanical stuff, like fans, switches, and drives, that
are prone to wear.

BTW - Here's a freebee HDD monitoring tool if you have S.M.A.R.T
monitoring on your HDD, and it's enabled:

http://www.panterasoft.com/

2nd proggy down called 'HDD Health'.

It monitors probably more stuff then anybody would probably care to know,
and over the year and a half I've run it, I can't verify its prediction
ability, since I haven't had any failures. But it's kinda' reassuring seeing
it state my nearest expected TBF is 10/03/2013, predicted accurate
w/i 97%! ;-)
--
Strat

In article ,
~misfit~ wrote:
John Donson wrote:
Kirk Pearson wrote:
As a friendly suggestion, please move discussions about distributed
computing projects and clients (and the BOINC aspects of BOINC-based
SETI@home) to the comp.distributed newsgroup. You'll make the
comp.distributed people happy by giving their newsgroup more (and
appropriate) traffic, and you'll make the SETI purists here happy by
not mentioning the word "BOINC" :-) Thanks!


Oh? Are there many SETI-purists who object to BOINC?

If there are they're a dying breed. Or will be soon.

Kirk, stupid request mate. SETI is moving to BOINC, therefore BOINC-based
SETI@home is on-topic for these newsgroups buddy. You want these NGs to die
in a few months when SETI classic is turned off?

Evolve or die.
--
~misfit~

G'day misfit,

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not a SETI purist. I am a distributed
computing zealot, as anyone who's visited my website in the past 5 years can
attest. BOINC is an important part of the SETI@home project, and is making
great contributions to the overall SETI project. But, the two Usenet
newsgroups created for seti were created for discussing the science of SETI
and not for discussing the distributed computing client applications used
for SETI@home. You, and others who have not been here since these newsgroups
were created, need to remember that SETI@home is not all of SETI--it is only a
part of it. To "evolve or die," as you suggest, we should leave the SETI
newsgroups for discussion of the science of SETI overall, and for the
scientific aspects of SETI@home, Optical SETI, and any other projects which
arise to further the study of SETI, and move the discussion of the technical
and user aspects of SETI@home and BOINC, and all other distributed computing
projects, to comp.distributed, where they are more appropriate. The SETI
newsgroups will not die, as you suggest. They will contain conversations
more in line with the original goals for the SETI newsgroups, conversations
in which the "SETI purists" to which I referred previously, are more
interested.

To answer John's reply: most SETI purists probably appreciate BOINC, since it
is doing so much to further the study of SETI, but they DO object to the
discussion of technical and user aspects of BOINC in the SETI newsgroups, as
you will see in many past posts.

--
Kirk Pearson, editor of Internet-based Distributed Computing Projects
http://www.aspenleaf.com/distributed/
Time sneaks up on you like a windshield on a bug. -- John Lithgow

In article ,
~misfit~ wrote:
John Donson wrote:
Kirk Pearson wrote:
As a friendly suggestion, please move discussions about distributed
computing projects and clients (and the BOINC aspects of BOINC-based
SETI@home) to the comp.distributed newsgroup. You'll make the
comp.distributed people happy by giving their newsgroup more (and
appropriate) traffic, and you'll make the SETI purists here happy by
not mentioning the word "BOINC" :-) Thanks!


Oh? Are there many SETI-purists who object to BOINC?

If there are they're a dying breed. Or will be soon.

Kirk, stupid request mate. SETI is moving to BOINC, therefore BOINC-based
SETI@home is on-topic for these newsgroups buddy. You want these NGs to die
in a few months when SETI classic is turned off?

Evolve or die.
--
~misfit~

G'day misfit,

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not a SETI purist. I am a distributed
computing zealot, as anyone who's visited my website in the past 5 years can
attest. BOINC is an important part of the SETI@home project, and is making
great contributions to the overall SETI project. But, the two Usenet
newsgroups created for seti were created for discussing the science of SETI
and not for discussing the distributed computing client applications used
for SETI@home. You, and others who have not been here since these newsgroups
were created, need to remember that SETI@home is not all of SETI--it is only a
part of it. To "evolve or die," as you suggest, we should leave the SETI
newsgroups for discussion of the science of SETI overall, and for the
scientific aspects of SETI@home, Optical SETI, and any other projects which
arise to further the study of SETI, and move the discussion of the technical
and user aspects of SETI@home and BOINC, and all other distributed computing
projects, to comp.distributed, where they are more appropriate. The SETI
newsgroups will not die, as you suggest. They will contain conversations
more in line with the original goals for the SETI newsgroups, conversations
in which the "SETI purists" to which I referred previously, are more
interested.

To answer John's reply: most SETI purists probably appreciate BOINC, since it
is doing so much to further the study of SETI, but they DO object to the
discussion of technical and user aspects of BOINC in the SETI newsgroups, as
you will see in many past posts.

--
Kirk Pearson, editor of Internet-based Distributed Computing Projects
http://www.aspenleaf.com/distributed/
Time sneaks up on you like a windshield on a bug. -- John Lithgow

In article ,
ytrewq wrote:
Huh?
It seems to me that BOINC belongs here for the time being (for those who
choose to post here, of course).
Many Seti participants still running "stand alone" Seti (includes me) read
BOINC posts here.

BUT, nice try at a bit of self-promotion, Kirk!

Constrew it however you like, ytrewq, my main goal is to move distributed
computing software discussions to comp.distributed (which I do not own),
where they belong, and leave the SETI newsgroups for the discussion of the
science of SETI. Discussions of the science of the BOINC SETI client (like
whether it finds Gaussians accurately or whether it should look for triplets)
belog in the SETI newsgroups. Discussions of when the BOINC client can't
connect to the SETI@home project server or how hot it makes some users' CPUs
belong in the comp.distributed newsgroup.

--
Kirk Pearson, editor of Internet-based Distributed Computing Projects
http://www.aspenleaf.com/distributed/
Time sneaks up on you like a windshield on a bug. -- John Lithgow

In article ,
ytrewq wrote:
Huh?
It seems to me that BOINC belongs here for the time being (for those who
choose to post here, of course).
Many Seti participants still running "stand alone" Seti (includes me) read
BOINC posts here.

BUT, nice try at a bit of self-promotion, Kirk!

Constrew it however you like, ytrewq, my main goal is to move distributed
computing software discussions to comp.distributed (which I do not own),
where they belong, and leave the SETI newsgroups for the discussion of the
science of SETI. Discussions of the science of the BOINC SETI client (like
whether it finds Gaussians accurately or whether it should look for triplets)
belog in the SETI newsgroups. Discussions of when the BOINC client can't
connect to the SETI@home project server or how hot it makes some users' CPUs
belong in the comp.distributed newsgroup.

--
Kirk Pearson, editor of Internet-based Distributed Computing Projects
http://www.aspenleaf.com/distributed/
Time sneaks up on you like a windshield on a bug. -- John Lithgow

0


---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for virii/trojans by AVG.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 8/4/2004

0


---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for virii/trojans by AVG.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 8/4/2004

Kirk Pearson wrote:
In article ,
~misfit~ wrote:
John Donson wrote:
Kirk Pearson wrote:
As a friendly suggestion, please move discussions about
distributed computing projects and clients (and the BOINC
aspects of BOINC-based SETI@home) to the comp.distributed
newsgroup. You'll make the comp.distributed people happy by
giving their newsgroup more (and appropriate) traffic, and
you'll make the SETI purists here happy by not mentioning the
word "BOINC" :-) Thanks!


Oh? Are there many SETI-purists who object to BOINC?

If there are they're a dying breed. Or will be soon.

Kirk, stupid request mate. SETI is moving to BOINC, therefore
BOINC-based SETI@home is on-topic for these newsgroups buddy. You
want these NGs to die in a few months when SETI classic is turned
off?

Evolve or die.
--
~misfit~

G'day misfit,

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not a SETI purist. I am a
distributed computing zealot, as anyone who's visited my website in
the past 5 years can attest. BOINC is an important part of the
SETI@home project, and is making great contributions to the overall
SETI project. But, the two Usenet newsgroups created for seti were
created for discussing the science of SETI and not for discussing
the distributed computing client applications used
for SETI@home. You, and others who have not been here since these
newsgroups were created, need to remember that SETI@home is not all
of SETI--it is only a part of it. To "evolve or die," as you
suggest, we should leave the SETI newsgroups for discussion of the
science of SETI overall, and for the scientific aspects of
SETI@home, Optical SETI, and any other projects which arise to
further the study of SETI, and move the discussion of the technical
and user aspects of SETI@home and BOINC, and all other distributed
computing projects, to comp.distributed, where they are more
appropriate. The SETI newsgroups will not die, as you suggest.
They will contain conversations more in line with the original goals
for the SETI newsgroups, conversations in which the "SETI purists"
to which I referred previously, are more interested.

To answer John's reply: most SETI purists probably appreciate BOINC,
since it is doing so much to further the study of SETI, but they DO
object to the discussion of technical and user aspects of BOINC in
the SETI newsgroups, as you will see in many past posts.


I'm sorry, but I've been following this newsgroup for a while now, and I
haven't seen a single post complaining about too much boinc in the group.

Kirk Pearson wrote:
In article ,
~misfit~ wrote:
John Donson wrote:
Kirk Pearson wrote:
As a friendly suggestion, please move discussions about
distributed computing projects and clients (and the BOINC
aspects of BOINC-based SETI@home) to the comp.distributed
newsgroup. You'll make the comp.distributed people happy by
giving their newsgroup more (and appropriate) traffic, and
you'll make the SETI purists here happy by not mentioning the
word "BOINC" :-) Thanks!


Oh? Are there many SETI-purists who object to BOINC?

If there are they're a dying breed. Or will be soon.

Kirk, stupid request mate. SETI is moving to BOINC, therefore
BOINC-based SETI@home is on-topic for these newsgroups buddy. You
want these NGs to die in a few months when SETI classic is turned
off?

Evolve or die.
--
~misfit~

G'day misfit,

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not a SETI purist. I am a
distributed computing zealot, as anyone who's visited my website in
the past 5 years can attest. BOINC is an important part of the
SETI@home project, and is making great contributions to the overall
SETI project. But, the two Usenet newsgroups created for seti were
created for discussing the science of SETI and not for discussing
the distributed computing client applications used
for SETI@home. You, and others who have not been here since these
newsgroups were created, need to remember that SETI@home is not all
of SETI--it is only a part of it. To "evolve or die," as you
suggest, we should leave the SETI newsgroups for discussion of the
science of SETI overall, and for the scientific aspects of
SETI@home, Optical SETI, and any other projects which arise to
further the study of SETI, and move the discussion of the technical
and user aspects of SETI@home and BOINC, and all other distributed
computing projects, to comp.distributed, where they are more
appropriate. The SETI newsgroups will not die, as you suggest.
They will contain conversations more in line with the original goals
for the SETI newsgroups, conversations in which the "SETI purists"
to which I referred previously, are more interested.

To answer John's reply: most SETI purists probably appreciate BOINC,
since it is doing so much to further the study of SETI, but they DO
object to the discussion of technical and user aspects of BOINC in
the SETI newsgroups, as you will see in many past posts.


I'm sorry, but I've been following this newsgroup for a while now, and I
haven't seen a single post complaining about too much boinc in the group.

Kirk Pearson wrote:
In article ,
~misfit~ wrote:
John Donson wrote:
Kirk Pearson wrote:
As a friendly suggestion, please move discussions about
distributed computing projects and clients (and the BOINC aspects
of BOINC-based SETI@home) to the comp.distributed newsgroup.
You'll make the comp.distributed people happy by giving their
newsgroup more (and appropriate) traffic, and you'll make the
SETI purists here happy by not mentioning the word "BOINC" :-)
Thanks!


Oh? Are there many SETI-purists who object to BOINC?

If there are they're a dying breed. Or will be soon.

Kirk, stupid request mate. SETI is moving to BOINC, therefore
BOINC-based SETI@home is on-topic for these newsgroups buddy. You
want these NGs to die in a few months when SETI classic is turned
off?

Evolve or die.
--
~misfit~

G'day misfit,

Hi Kirk.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not a SETI purist. I am a
distributed computing zealot, as anyone who's visited my website in
the past 5 years can attest. BOINC is an important part of the
SETI@home project, and is making great contributions to the overall
SETI project. But, the two Usenet newsgroups created for seti were
created for discussing the science of SETI and not for discussing the
distributed computing client applications used
for SETI@home.

Wrong Kirk. alt.sci.seti was created on 1st June 1999. Guess what happened
17 days before that? That's right, S@H went 'live'. The original charter,
which I had the URL to in a post to Raj, that I'm not hunting for again,
said that the group was for the dicussion of all things SETI, including S@H.
It did mention that, if it was warranted, a new group, alt.sci.seti.at-home
would be created for S@H in particular. Looks about I don't see that group
so I'm still using this group as per it's original charter.

You, and others who have not been here since these
newsgroups were created, need to remember that SETI@home is not all
of SETI--it is only a part of it.

If you have been here since this newsgroup was created then I'm not telling
you anything new in the above. The charter was also the very first post to
this newsgroup. (ass). And thanks for the condescending attitiude, I'm fully
aware that there is more to SETI than the Berkeley initiative. I first heard
the term SETI in the early '70's and have been interested ever since. I must
have read three sci-fi books a week for a decade, in the "golden days" of
sci-fi. I'm not interested in using my PC to study medications for some
global phamacuetical company (working though sponsership of a university
project for 'legitimacy').

To "evolve or die," as you
suggest, we should leave the SETI newsgroups for discussion of the
science of SETI overall, and for the scientific aspects of SETI@home,
Optical SETI, and any other projects which arise to further the study
of SETI, and move the discussion of the technical and user aspects of
SETI@home and BOINC, and all other distributed computing projects, to
comp.distributed, where they are more appropriate.

No, the group alt.sci.seti.at-home should be created as originlly planned.
You remember that post of course, in June of '99, since you were here from
the beggining. (Although Google has no record of you posting here before
2000) I don't want to go to a group where over 50% of the discussion is
off-topic for me. I'm not interested in DC in and of itself, I'm interested
in SETI.

The SETI
newsgroups will not die, as you suggest. They will contain
conversations more in line with the original goals for the SETI
newsgroups, conversations in which the "SETI purists" to which I
referred previously, are more interested.

As I said, you seem to have an inaccurate grasp of the 'original goals' of
at least one of these newsgroups. I don't know about the charter for sas (I
don't post there per-se, my posts only appear there if I reply to a
cross-posted message) but maybe you can make that a group for the "SETI
purists" and leave ass to it's original charter. Surely the "SETI purists"
don't need two groups, it would be far easier for them to stick to just one.
Wanting two groups is just plain greedy. Anyway, my ISP doesn't carry the
"comp.distributed newsgroup" so I'm not going anywhere.

To answer John's reply: most SETI purists probably appreciate BOINC,
since it is doing so much to further the study of SETI, but they DO
object to the discussion of technical and user aspects of BOINC in
the SETI newsgroups, as you will see in many past posts.

Aww, diddums. The 'alt' series of NG's are a lot more lax in what is, and
what isn't OT in them. I suggest you and your puritans stick to the NG sas.
But then you say you're not a purist. Hmmm, why would you presume to be
speaking on their behalf then?

Who created the comp.distributed newsgroup anyway?

Have a nice day.
--
~misfit~