The Folding Ethics thread.

[Redwight]

Originally Posted by cwispy

Its simple, when your running folding, the cpu never goes to go to idle state. As soon as your not using the system, folding takes all the cpu it can take and the dissipation of the system peaks. I can guarantee that a high end system that is doing nothing at all, not folding, not seti@home, is only going to be drawing around 45 to 60W max and when its cpu is working at 100% it will be drawing ~200W or even more depending on the system specs as per what joey posted.



What the? Have you rewritten ohms law and I didn't hear about it??? This has to be the funniest statement that I think I have read this year. I am yet to see a switchmode psu such as a ATX psu dissipating its rated output of say 400W with no load, I wonder where it all goes too...

It is an interesting comment but have any of you actually tested the idea? Any comparative numbers to go by?
Seriously I had a MOV in an analogue PSU explode beside me this morning.

[Joey]

Originally Posted by Redwight

That's about the most cohesive comment you have made so far, but it still doesn't make any actual comparison to how much power the PC uses while idle; where are the facts for that?

What an absolutely stupid statement! who gives a toss what a PC uses while idle ? this thread is about how much of a waste running folding is so how is a PC going to be idle while folding ? The only true comparison is the facts provided for cost while folding or simply switching the PC off.
Switch it off and achieve nothing or switch it on and pay to achieve nothing .

Originally Posted by Redwight

I fix some power supplies at work and find most switchmodes have a limited range of variation, and as a result it seems to matter little if they are hard at work or idleing. The best idea with a PC power supply is to match it closely to the demand the PC has to reduce inefficiency.

Another pointless statement , what does it matter what is is drawing while under full load or idle , the only concern here is how much it draws and costs while folding for which I have given some good examples , You can start a new thread about power supply technology if you want or scarlet fever and Christopher Columbus or whatever dribble you come up with next.

Originally Posted by Redwight

And I still don't get what you are trying to achieve by sticking it up, is being a negative type somehow fulfilling?

I'm pretty much convinced you dont get anything ,exactly the type of sucker these projects target.
But just in case you need it explained for the 8th time now this started with a simple question " Why do people fold" and about the only answer amongst all your dribble you have given is because it does no "extra harm".
I am curious how asking for facts is negative ??

[Joey]

Originally Posted by Ramjet

On the subject of carbon nanotubes, they have discovered that their fibres may have a similar effect on the human lungs as the silicate mineral asbestos - mesothelioma. I think that it’s great that they picked this up before large scale manufacture and researching the effects BEFORE its introduction into mainstream use. Was it data from folding that picked this up? Who knows?

Maybe the human race is getting smarter and finding issues with stuff before going too far, if this is a by-product of networked computing then the people who are organising it all are idiots for not promoting the fact. It wouldn’t surprise me…technical people are hopeless at promoting a cause and general communication of their research. Need a few marketing types in there to blow their bags about it…

No the data was not from folding , it hasn't even reached the stage where they are certain if the computations are correct or if the whole approach is flawed.

As I have mentioned there has been nothing discovered or solved from network computing as far as the folding or seti projects are concerned so there is nothing worthwhile promoting.
Don't stress if something worthwhile had happened it would be front page news

[Redwight]

Originally Posted by Joey

What an absolutely stupid statement! who gives a toss what a PC uses while idle ? this thread is about how much of a waste running folding is so how is a PC going to be idle while folding ? The only true comparison is the facts provided for cost while folding or simply switching the PC off.
Switch it off and achieve nothing or switch it on and pay to achieve nothing .

I have several PC's around here, some are even mine. One that runs dual boot will sit around all day without the fan on the oversized heatsink kicking in until I start a game; it runs Linux. If I however boot up XP the CPU fan runs half speed and the GPU fan goes nuts, at idle and only gets worse if I get a windows based game running. And this is a big point the MCE machine runs windows which never seems to let up on the processor anyway, and adding the Folding in is only adding to an already heavily used PC.
The extra use on the CPU is likely to reduce it's life span, the hard drives actually seem to be more reliable when they are in use a lot. But that raises questions about how people upgrade or repair PC's anyway. Are half of the upgrades necessary?
It's like doing an overall emissions analasis on a hybrid car, the bigger the car the worse the numbers get but they are making them to make people feel that they are doing something worthwhile and they sell well for that reason.
So has anybody got any actual numbers for a reference machine that show that at standby it uses so much. looking at the desktop it uses more and falt out it uses the maximum. You are currently only trying to sell me the idea I'm stupid without a single well thought out reason for it. And you are confusing disdain for competitive behaviour as a reason to do nothing. Get on with it.

[Joey]

Hey Sanity can you check the IP redwight is using , I think this might be the return or replacement "Crash"

[cwispy]

Originally Posted by Redwight

It is an interesting comment but have any of you actually tested the idea? Any comparative numbers to go by?
Seriously I had a MOV in an analogue PSU explode beside me this morning.

I dont see what a MOV has to do with the psu's power dissipation. The voltage went too high for the mov, so it popped, like it is designed to do.

Anyway, just for some actual hard facts and numbers, I did some testing today and these are the results.

For this first test I used a 350W atx psu, intel mainboard with P4 3.06GHz D and a WD 160Gb hdd. This was just powered up, no OS etc.

Results:
350W ATX psu in standby (plugged in, but not turned on) = 7W
350W ATX psu powered on with no load connected = 12W
350W ATX psu + above mainboard + hdd = 55W

Then I used a complete system which has intel mainboard, Q6600 2.4 quad core with 2Gb ram and 500Gb hdd and a 450W psu. The monitor was plugged directly into the mains so is not included in these results power results.

450W ATX psu in standby (also with mainboard in standby) = 17W
450W ATX psu, complete system idle (vista) = 60W
450W ATX psu, with folding tray client = 86W
450W ATX psu, with smp console client = 100W

So as you can see, the system is never idle when the clients are running and you are always dissipating a lot more power than the system would normally use, even if it was just turned on. Now I didnt bother going through any of the extra performance options and posts on the forums etc, but I am sure I would be able to get the power usage to go even higher that what I have found if I spent some time on it.

Whatever the case, when the console client is running, the system is using 66% more power than it was when sitting at the desktop idle. That is 345.5kwH per year, or $44.93 if worked out at $0.13 per kwH, extra per system. That's going to add up to a hell of a lot of greenhouse gasses being created by the power generation plants and for what? I have no doubt that there are a lot of other systems out there which are far less efficient than the quad card I used today for the tests too.

[Redwight]

Base load power generation doesn't run at peak effiency either, they generate more than they need to so that as loads come and go there aren't huge spikes or dips in the supply. That generates extra emissions as well but you don't see anybody complaining about that.
I'm not trying to argue for or against the whole global waffle\ climate change debate, but there are far higher emission source out there.
Your number of $44.93 per year (?) is a bit different to joey at $23 per month. It's still a lot less than the air conditioner in my room uses, lots less than the 7 PC's at work that only get turned off on the weekend, actually is less than the lighting bills at work without adding in anything else.

I still cannot understand why you guys are so keen on seeing everybody stop. I have already pointed out I'm not kidding myself about the results or the immediate value. It would make more sense if the lot of us got together and pointed the computing industry in the direction of getting programs in place to better recycle used HDD's as an example. The big gains in storage sizes in recent times haven't been made by changing the platters, the heads and software are where a lot of gains are made.

You wish I was crash Joey, but so far I've been mostly coherant and haven't resorted to calling others stupid.

[Joey]

Originally Posted by Redwight

Base load power generation doesn't run at peak effiency either, they generate more than they need to so that as loads come and go there aren't huge spikes or dips in the supply. That generates extra emissions as well but you don't see anybody complaining about that.
I'm not trying to argue for or against the whole global waffle climate change debate, but there are far higher emission source out there.
Your number of $44.93 per year (?) is a bit different to joey at $23 per month. It's still a lot less than the air conditioner in my room uses, lots less than the 7 PC's at work that only get turned off on the weekend, actually is less than the lighting bills at work without adding in anything else.

I still cannot understand why you guys are so keen on seeing everybody stop. I have already pointed out I'm not kidding myself about the results or the immediate value. It would make more sense if the lot of us got together and pointed the computing industry in the direction of getting programs in place to better recycle used HDD's as an example. The big gains in storage sizes in recent times haven't been made by changing the platters, the heads and software are where a lot of gains are made.

You wish I was crash Joey, but so far I've been mostly coherant and haven't resorted to calling others stupid.

Have you ever thought about getting into politics ? cant say I have seen so much crap written that avoids the actually topic.

Using the figures that cwispy so kindly provided $44.93 per Year now multiply it buy the 250,000 people folding according to standford's 2008 records , that is a mind blowing $11,232,500.00 per year.
This cost is calculated on WA's 13cent per KW which is cheaper than most states of Australia and less than other countries , so the cost are much higher in reality. ( this is just electricity costs nothing else )

The reason I am so keen to see this rubbish stopped is because no one has given a reason that justifies such ridiculous wastage.
Don't kid yourself redwight if you think what you have been saying is even close to coherant , crash thought it was everyone else as well that didn't get what he was saying.

[mate]

Your not even meant to be on this site so dont push your luck -Sanity

[cwispy]

Originally Posted by Joey

Using the figures that cwispy so kindly provided $44.93 per Year now multiply it buy the 250,000 people folding according to standford's 2008 records , that is a mind blowing $11,232,500.00 per year.

Working on what the power in WA will be next month, 18.46c that figure becomes $15,944,825 and if people are running it on work systems, that goes way way higher again.

To write it another way...

it is an extra 86.375 GWh of power generation, yes that is GigaWatt-Hours...

Yes that's 86,375,000,000 Watt-Hours. Now tell us that is not having a seriously detrimental effect on the atmosphere? And to top it all off, these figures would have to be on the low side.

Based on some sources, a coal powered generation station produces 966g of CO2 per KWh of power generated, so with these figures, we have an additional 83,438,250Kg of CO2 emission's alone. There is also many other noxious gasses which are given off, so why would anyone do it when the disadvantages seem to far outweigh the lack of any benefits?

[Redwight]

Thanks guys that just cleared it up for me.

[Arbiter]

I think most have missed the plot here.
Apart from the alleged greenhouse gas emissions produced by folding (or not), I am surprised that no one has asked the obvious:
What would they do with the information if they managed to unravel the human double helix?
Pardon the cynic in me, but we all know damn well the world runs on money.
What if, by some miracle, the genetic footprint for say, cancer in all it's forms was unveiled?
Bet your best sat dish they would sell the information to the highest bidding pharacuetical company.
Does folding make you a stockholder?
It's all warm and fuzzy to do something for mankind, but reality check first.
Sad but true.

[Redwight]

Originally Posted by Arbiter

Pardon the cynic in me, but we all know damn well the world runs on money.

Actually money is more like the oil on the machinery that makes other aspects of our lives possible; it's not much of a defining value for anything the way it can be manipulated.

[dogknees]

Originally Posted by Sanity

I cant really see this thread solving anything.

Unless anyone can explain in plain english what has been achieved from folding , you could argue for a year. The point is , their website doesnt explain anything to the lay person about what they have achieved other than some non comprehensive babble. Thats really the only way I can label it from reading it. They seem to be relying on the fact that you think you are doing something to save the world / mankind and dont/wont really question them about what it is and what it is achieving.

If anyone can decipher what they have achieved from what is on their website and can post it in plain english , please do so. Otherwise I can honestly say that I cant really understand participating in something for which no information is really provided. You could be grading university papers or doing a companies work for all you know

And why should we bother explaining this to you? If you want to understand the "non comprehensive babble" go and learn. No one but you is responsible for whether you understand it or not. Perhaps if you'd paid attention at school and made an effort to keep up with modern science and technology, you'd understand what they're doing.

At the end of the day, if you don't wish to contribute, that's fine, but don't for a moment expect everyone else to agree with you and congratulate you on your lack of knowledge.

[Sanity]

Originally Posted by dogknees

And why should we bother explaining this to you?

It seems you cant anyway , no one really has so far. It doesnt appear to have achieved a great deal for the amount of effort and vast amounts of power involved. But thats what this thread is actually about " the ethics of folding "...what has it achieved and is it worth it. If you dont like that , stiff shit.

If you want to understand the "non comprehensive babble" go and learn.

Learn what ? From what I have seen so far there is very little gain for a lot of effort. There does seem to be a few " my dick is bigger than yours " types involved with it though from what I have seen.

No one but you is responsible for whether you understand it or not. Perhaps if you'd paid attention at school and made an effort to keep up with modern science and technology, you'd understand what they're doing.

Now lets see......how does the learnings of modern science and technolgy of 1980 stack up against todays learnings of modern science and technology ?
I cant seem to recall anything I learnt in school in 1980 being applicable to what folding does or doesnt do today. You are either a troll or extremely stupid.

At the end of the day, if you don't wish to contribute, that's fine, but don't for a moment expect everyone else to agree with you and congratulate you on your lack of knowledge.

Attitudes like yours are part of the reason folding on this site has almost ceased to exist.....why would anyone want to join ? If you dare to question how folding does or doesnt work you receive some half brained elitest dribble insults from a self proclaimed expert.

Another reason it has almost ceased to exist on this site is that after maybe 6-7 years ( maybe more ) that Austech has had a folding team , no one can or will explain the benefits of folding , what it is , or what it has or will eventually achieve.

Of course should someone dare to ask a question in regards to any of the above , they are guaranteed to be met with a rude response from someone like yourself , so of course your cause takes yet another step backwards.

RIP Austech Folding. Its an elite club that gets smaller and smaller each year because no one will join for these reasons.

[gw1]

I've found this thread an interesting retrospective on Austech folding, something I'd not gotten around to reading before.

There's never been any doubt in my mind that background (or overnight scheduled) services add significantly to your power bill - whether folding, SETI, AVI transcoding, torrenting or whatever. It's just a matter of degree and whether it's worth it in the opinion of the person paying the bill. cwispy's practical figures are helpful and realistic I think.

There's a broader question of whether power bills cover the actual cost to the planet in terms of carbon emission, green power etc. I won't attempt to tackle that issue. It's always stuck in my craw that power intensive companies (like my neighbourhood's Pasminco/Nyrstar's aluminium smelter) buy their power incredibly cheaply on contracts that amount to taxpayer subsidies. Of course those subsidies are offset by the jobs they sustain though. Any serious ethical consideration of power consumption is bound to be complex and contentious.

There's no doubt that many forum members who participate in folding do so to showcase their equipment - a bit like those into car modding or restoration. That's very human and nothing to be ashamed of. At some point every enthusiast or collector gets questioned about the amount of money they spend on their hobby (even if only by the wife). In a world with unevenly distributed resources we're all vulnerable and prone to finger-pointing about how we live. We don't have to go overseas to find poor neighbourhoods that bring ethical questions to mind.

Is folding worthwhile? Maybe, maybe not. Millions are poured into cancer research each year, and though we aren't seeing silver-bullet cures that doesn't mean those millions aren't being well spent. I think it's safe to say that turning your PC off at night and donating the money saved to gene and cancer research charities is more practical and has better odds of bringing about a medical breakthrough. It's likely to be better for the environment too. But I'm not about to preach to anyone - I still torrent my Dr Who library at night rather than squander my grocery budget at the ABC Shop.

[Sanity]

Yes it does open the door to some interesting questions, theories and ideas but unfortunately as has been the case in the past, if you question folding you are attcked for it.

I can remember when folding first started and Austech started its own team. It was promoted by an Austech Administrator " Insane " who put in a lot of work to get it up and running and promoting it to members. Initially , the response was excellent.

Austech has 462 folders. Yet it now only has 14 active folders. A huge 448 no longer participate.

Why ? I have previously mentioned a few reasons that I think apply. One is that after this amount of time ( it would have to be 7-8 years ) , what has it achieved ? Participants are realistically told nothing and are expected to just keep at. Another is that it is no longer heavily promoted on this site ( as mentioned Insane but a lot of time in to it ) and that any questions about it are ignored or are responded to in the same manner that " dogknees " responded to my post.

All up there isnt much incentive to participate IMO. I would be interested to see all up figures as to how many active folders there are now compared to say 3 , 5 and 7 years ago. Like anything that isnt actively promoted , I can just see it eventually dying in the arse completely if they done revamp it in some way , particuarly by showing people some easy to understand results that have been achieved after all this time.

[Pom]

Yep, sure is disappointing that the results indicate 3/5 of 5/8 of FA progress, but I look at it like mapping the human DNA.

While you are doing it everybody asks "Why Bother" but now mapping the human DNA has been done, they have identified many genes that are associated with specific diseases and been able to develop tests that indicate a predisposition to various illnesses and some treatments have been improved as well.

So, folding may not be the golden bullet, but who knows what may be uncovered? Why not make an effort? My PC's are on anyway and some are carrying out other duties at the same time.

Costs me bugger all, and it's easy to come up with a 100 reasons as to not bother, but heaven forbid, these guys MAY come up with some bloody good results at the end of the day.

If ya recon it's all for sh!t, don't bother, but myself I can't seem the harm in contributing.

My 2c worth,
Pom

[Redwight]

Originally Posted by Sanity

Yes it does open the door to some interesting questions, theories and ideas but unfortunately as has been the case in the past, if you question folding you are attcked for it.

Actually if I've attacked anybody it is because in typical internet troll fashion they have 'walked into' a conversation they have little interest in and mouthed off about what a bunch of idiots the few folders are without having offered a single valuable reason to do so. Even the one who has left me bad rep wasn't being even remotely polite about it; using the PM system to a few of the participants would have bought about a much clearer picture and without the need for the BS and agro and whining. If you did that inside my residence you would get a similar response, I'm no different in real life to here. I've had a gutful of rude spoilt children a long time ago.
It has prompted me to rethink how I'm using two of my four PC's here but really the difference is going to be minimal.