Signed it.
In the ZDNet article it says that there's only 2 months left in SETI. Is SETI@Home ending at the end of the year? I must admit I don't come around the DC forum very often anymore and haven't heard anything about the program ending. That doesn't mean I've lost interest in SETI, though!
Also, every single wu to my credit is totally mine. They were all processed on MY computers that I built. None were processed on "company" computers. All 4600+ are totally mine. I'm very proud of what I've done and I hate thinking that there are people with thousands of bogus wu's to their credit. Why would anyone cheat anyway? It's not like there's a million dollar prize up for grabs. What's the incentive to cheat? Bragging rights? Honestly, most (maybe all) of my friends think the whole SETI project is stupid. They wouldn't give a damn about me bragging about wu's.
In the ZDNet article it says that there's only 2 months left in SETI. Is SETI@Home ending at the end of the year? I must admit I don't come around the DC forum very often anymore and haven't heard anything about the program ending. That doesn't mean I've lost interest in SETI, though!
Also, every single wu to my credit is totally mine. They were all processed on MY computers that I built. None were processed on "company" computers. All 4600+ are totally mine. I'm very proud of what I've done and I hate thinking that there are people with thousands of bogus wu's to their credit. Why would anyone cheat anyway? It's not like there's a million dollar prize up for grabs. What's the incentive to cheat? Bragging rights? Honestly, most (maybe all) of my friends think the whole SETI project is stupid. They wouldn't give a damn about me bragging about wu's.
Assimilator1
Elite Member
- Nov 4, 1999
- 24,125
- 508
- 126
Maggotry
S@H is due to finish in Feb/March with S@H2 taking over about the same time.
ZDNet ,unless they know something we don't have got their maths wrong.
Info about S@H2 (BOINC) & timetable
S@H is due to finish in Feb/March with S@H2 taking over about the same time.
ZDNet ,unless they know something we don't have got their maths wrong.
Info about S@H2 (BOINC) & timetable
Crazee
Elite Member
- Nov 20, 2001
- 5,736
- 0
- 76
From what I can see it that is not the only thing they have gotten wrong. Rickman did not post a 41% number like they claim anywhere I can find.
I think it is good that Berkeley is going to address this, however I think some of the methods that were employed to get this to come about were less than honorable. It has painted the whole S@NL team with a broad brush and we know that the vast majority of those guys are honest and good people.
I think it is good that Berkeley is going to address this, however I think some of the methods that were employed to get this to come about were less than honorable. It has painted the whole S@NL team with a broad brush and we know that the vast majority of those guys are honest and good people.
So.... Is there a possibility that not all of the data in S@H has been crunched(legitimately)? Or is this a small enough deal(in the scope of overall seti WU outputs) so that we don't have to worry that. I assume that all available datas have been processed correctly, so I guess S@H, in the end, hasn't lost the main objective. That's what I hope, anyway. Cheaters are pricks. I've always suspected that some producers who do 4-digits output all by themselves were cheating. Having worked for large corporations doing field/network support, I've always wondered how some of these big hitters managed to propagate SETI installations to enough machines to produce what they produce. I suppose it's more feasible to produce high # of results now that P3/P4 servers/workstations are more widely available, but I just couldn't fathom getting the OK to run SETI on enough end-user machines, not couting having to deal with different managers on different departments. Obviously, I've thought about server farms doing SETI too, but to me that's even less likely(that could be coming from the fact the last 2 bosses I had choked my ass constantly). I can very well imagine 6 or 700 WUs from one floor of a data center, but the numbers I've been seeing recently is just unreal.
Having said that, I can't say that I care too much about this fiasco as long as S@H's effort has not been for naught. I realize that we're losing ground to cheating punks who've never won anything in their lives, but as long as S@H is satisfied that all its data have been processed correctly, I'm ok. As silly as this may sound, I just want to meet the little green men, and I want to be a part of the search. I won't even bother to wonder why anyone would cheat in a "competition" where you really win nothing for yourself, but... Well, I have my little theories/observations about them, but I don't think it would fly too well even in here.
Anyway, the project is almost over so... Later cheaterz!
Having said that, I can't say that I care too much about this fiasco as long as S@H's effort has not been for naught. I realize that we're losing ground to cheating punks who've never won anything in their lives, but as long as S@H is satisfied that all its data have been processed correctly, I'm ok. As silly as this may sound, I just want to meet the little green men, and I want to be a part of the search. I won't even bother to wonder why anyone would cheat in a "competition" where you really win nothing for yourself, but... Well, I have my little theories/observations about them, but I don't think it would fly too well even in here.
Anyway, the project is almost over so... Later cheaterz! So.... Is there a possibility that not all of the data in S@H has been crunched(legitimately)? Or is this a small enough deal(in the scope of overall seti WU outputs) so that we don't have to worry that.
The Berkeley Response
So far, one account has had 600,000 WUs zeroed out. Not 6,000, not 60,000, 600,000 from one account, with 10,000 possibly being legit. Other suspect accounts are under investigation. I anticipate well over 1,000,000 - 3,000,000 to be removed. 'Tis sad.
Based on the total WUs received, this may not seem like alot but for something that bills itself as a "scientific experiment", that is unacceptable.
[EDIT: Stay tuned...]
The Berkeley Response
So far, one account has had 600,000 WUs zeroed out. Not 6,000, not 60,000, 600,000 from one account, with 10,000 possibly being legit. Other suspect accounts are under investigation. I anticipate well over 1,000,000 - 3,000,000 to be removed. 'Tis sad.
Based on the total WUs received, this may not seem like alot but for something that bills itself as a "scientific experiment", that is unacceptable.
[EDIT: Stay tuned...
]Poof, Thanks for keeping us updated on this subject!
I've moved up 4 spots in the last 24 hours. The first upward move in a few months!
I've moved up 4 spots in the last 24 hours. The first upward move in a few months!
Originally posted by: JWMiddleton
Poof, Thanks for keeping us updated on this subject!
I've moved up 4 spots in the last 24 hours. The first upward move in a few months!
Good going JWM!!!
Assimilator1
Elite Member
- Nov 4, 1999
- 24,125
- 508
- 126
Good to hear that SETI has taken action ,I hope that S@N isn't polluted with too many other cheaters!
Nice work Rickman
,I hope that S@N isn't polluted with too many other cheaters!Nice work Rickman
Here is the Official response that is being posted from SETI by Director Dr David Anderson:
Dave:
We zapped a couple of bogus 500K WU accounts and there'll be more to follow.
Here's the message we're posting on our boards.
Feel free to send it as you like.
-- David
Some SETI@home users have found ways to "cheat" - to get credit for work they didn't do.
We know that individual and team statistics are very important to many of our users,
and we'd like to keep accurate statistics.
However, our manpower is limited, and our top priorities are
1) looking for ET by finishing our back-end data analysis and
2) developing BOINC, the software basis for future SETI@home projects,
which is designed to be highly cheat-resistant.
But because of the recent increase in cheating, we're going to start investigating suspicious accounts.
If there is solid evidence we'll remove credit from the account and its team.
If you suspect someone of cheating, you're welcome to email me. I can't guarantee that we'll investigate that user,
or that you'll get a response; we'll do what we can.
The effects of this crackdown will soon be visible, and it will hopefully minimize the impact of the cheating problem.
Please bear with us until BOINC is released. (BOINC is open-source, so programmers can help us by
evaluating its cheat-prevention system; the code is at http://sf.net/projects/boinc).
David P. Anderson
Director, SETI@home
Dave:
We zapped a couple of bogus 500K WU accounts and there'll be more to follow.
Here's the message we're posting on our boards.
Feel free to send it as you like.
-- David
Some SETI@home users have found ways to "cheat" - to get credit for work they didn't do.
We know that individual and team statistics are very important to many of our users,
and we'd like to keep accurate statistics.
However, our manpower is limited, and our top priorities are
1) looking for ET by finishing our back-end data analysis and
2) developing BOINC, the software basis for future SETI@home projects,
which is designed to be highly cheat-resistant.
But because of the recent increase in cheating, we're going to start investigating suspicious accounts.
If there is solid evidence we'll remove credit from the account and its team.
If you suspect someone of cheating, you're welcome to email me. I can't guarantee that we'll investigate that user,
or that you'll get a response; we'll do what we can.
The effects of this crackdown will soon be visible, and it will hopefully minimize the impact of the cheating problem.
Please bear with us until BOINC is released. (BOINC is open-source, so programmers can help us by
evaluating its cheat-prevention system; the code is at http://sf.net/projects/boinc).
David P. Anderson
Director, SETI@home
Thanks for that update. Somewhat satisfactory but I still think there are things that they can do to at least let Teams "take care of their own", ie., giving Founders the ability to kick cheats from their Team. In a way, that would help isolate them to go solo or end up forming sole "cheat" teams, which are more easily dealt with as they would stand out.
I posted the above post from Dr Anderson at ARS Technica as well, it looks like that is where the uproar over the cheating got heated and may have been where ZDNet Australia got info to write the article. Poof also posts in there.
Edit: Poof and I were posting at the same time even, pretty typical of TeAmmates
Edit: Poof and I were posting at the same time even, pretty typical of TeAmmates
I admit I am getting slower in my old age, I turn 40 next month. I need to put an order in with Ray in getting a junior cane.
Thanks for the info Dave. I'm pleased with the words of David Anderson. I will be looking forward to seeing the bastards get what they deserve.
Ditto what Baldy said. The good thing is at least they're killing the obvious cheaters. Unfortunately, I have a feeling they're going to get flooded with Emails about "suspicious accounts". If that happens they may figure the problem is too large to fix with their limited staff and ignore it. Hopefully not.
Just checked my stats. I moved up 4 spots. WooHoo!
Oh, to you cheaters, get in back of the line punk!!!!! :|Thanks to Rickman for his efforts to weed out the cheaters!
While I'm glad to see some action being taken, I echo the words of others:
Why did it have to take this long for action to be taken?
Why did the DC community have to air the "dirty laundry" in the press?
Why did the admins at Berkeley basically have to have their butts kicked into gear by full exposure on dozens, if not hundreds, of Internet sites everywhere?!?
Reasonable folks would expect that the integrity of the data would be of paramount importance, especially in a project of this magnitude, but apparently the data integrity just isn't that important.
I'm very dissatisfied with how the Berkeley admins have chosen to handle this entire issue. :disgust:
Why did it have to take this long for action to be taken?
Why did the DC community have to air the "dirty laundry" in the press?
Why did the admins at Berkeley basically have to have their butts kicked into gear by full exposure on dozens, if not hundreds, of Internet sites everywhere?!?
Reasonable folks would expect that the integrity of the data would be of paramount importance, especially in a project of this magnitude, but apparently the data integrity just isn't that important.
I'm very dissatisfied with how the Berkeley admins have chosen to handle this entire issue. :disgust:
Good to see them taking action, too bad it took them this long.
Poof and Dave, you young kids....
heheheh...
Poof and Dave, you young kids....
heheheh...
Originally posted by: networkman
While I'm glad to see some action being taken, I echo the words of others:
Why did it have to take this long for action to be taken?
Why did the DC community have to air the "dirty laundry" in the press?
Why did the admins at Berkeley basically have to have their butts kicked into gear by full exposure on dozens, if not hundreds, of Internet sites everywhere?!?
Reasonable folks would expect that the integrity of the data would be of paramount importance, especially in a project of this magnitude, but apparently the data integrity just isn't that important.
I'm very dissatisfied with how the Berkeley admins have chosen to handle this entire issue. :disgust:
I'm not happy about the cheats or the slow response but I think the one thing we need to remember is SETI@Home is not a project with tons of $$$ to throw around. The good thing is the pressure from the right people resulted in results.
Networkman,
It's a real shame the few humans at SETI crew were backed into a corner by the dark side of humanity especially for a project looking beyond humanity itself.
They were well aware of the issues for a while. Dr Anderson and I were even e-mailing back and forth a few times about it for months. Everyone was just hoping to get through with that portion of the project without a bunch of bad hoopla. It was totally uncalled for by totally uncalled for people.
It's a real shame the few humans at SETI crew were backed into a corner by the dark side of humanity especially for a project looking beyond humanity itself.
They were well aware of the issues for a while. Dr Anderson and I were even e-mailing back and forth a few times about it for months. Everyone was just hoping to get through with that portion of the project without a bunch of bad hoopla. It was totally uncalled for by totally uncalled for people.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 14K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter