• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Who here pays $1.5M /Month for RC5 bandwith ?

N

NicColt

Diamond Member
You want fries with that. If these calculations are correct. Either David should get the Nobell prize for Technology, my calculator is defective, there is a conspiracy at Dnet or the State of Geogia have their heads screwed on backwards.

so .59c/sec x 60sec= $35.4/Minute x 60Min= $2124.00/Hr x 24hrs = $50,976/Day x 30days = $1,529,280/Month.

so even if I would be using my cable access at %100 which would be 300/mbits for RC5 that would be.

$35.00/Month \by 30 days= $1.16 \by 24hrs.= .04cents Hr. /by 60Minutes = .006cents/Minute. /by 60seconds= .0001cents per second.

so State of Georgia .59cents a second = $1.5Million /Month in Bandwith

%100 full load 300/Mbits full bandwith cable modem @ .0001cents a second 24/7 = $35 /Month in Bandwith

so who here has RC5 taking %100 full load of their cable or dsl modem 24/7 ?

so let's say it take %1 of your cable modem bandwith = .35cents and in that %1 of cable time you transmitted 50,000 blocks to Dnet. That would be 100,000,000 blocks for $7.00

so for $1,490,944 in bandwith you should have been able to transmit 212,992,000,000 Blocks /per month. but according to Dnet only 36,121,187,355 blocks have been sent in so far overall.

Well either the calculations of the State of Georgia are wrong. Or dnet have misplaced 176,870,812,645 bloks. RC5 would have been finished in less than a week and should have been over LONG ago.

Or maybee there just something insane about all of this.






 
As I said in two other posts, their math is a little more justified than you might think. However there are certainly other factors that completely cancel out any internet usage.

First of all, that quite insane rate of 59¢/sec is assuming that each computer that the University owns has it's own high speed connection. A ridiculous thought at first glance.
Here is an example based on 30 computers.

A monthly rate of approx. 50,000 big ones puts the rate at about 2¢/sec. In their reasoning, because of the "30 different connections" on each computer, that works out to a total of 59¢/sec.

The $415,000 came from a 6 month period of short bursts, where--by their reasoning--supposedly adds up to 8 days of constant internet access, which is another flaw in their 18 months of research (what were they doing? sleeping???).

Now you may see how exactly they came at this conclusion. However the actual number that they should have came up with, truthfully, is 0 but hypothetically speaking considering the 2¢/second rate total for all computers, the arrived number should have at max. been $138.65.\

This is still a misguided figure and should still be thrown out, because Dnet client always takes a backseat to any user process (not only including CPU cycles, but also network bandwidth) that would be requested. Therefore, they would be paying that $138 for unused bandwidth anyway.

[EDIT]So basically they're charging $415,812.84 for nothing, and $138.65 for putting unused clock cycles and bandwidth to a good scientific use.[/EDIT]
 
On his first post, he said that they were sueing him for $415,951.49 @ 59¢/second and charging him criminally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top