Folding Forum

JimboPalmer wrote:...They had to abandon research to devote to COVID-19, you can't ask them to abandon their research again. (I do hope they can eventually resume their older research, but that may requre going back to older Cores. Volunteers will hate going back to older Cores)

I wouldn't say abandon, but rather parked for the last few months. Moreover, when it comes to FahCores, it depends on the dataset/research type. If the additional dataset needs to be created which was generated by FahCore_a7/FahCore_21, then they will be used to ensure consistency. However, if there's no need for it, then they can easily use FahCore_a8/FahCore_22. These transition tends to take few years so I won't be surprised if an occasional new Project appears that uses FahCore_a7/FahCore_21 for research.

PantherX wrote:

JimboPalmer wrote:They had to abandon research to devote to COVID-19, you can't ask them to abandon their research again. (I do hope they can eventually resume their older research, but that may require going back to older Cores. Volunteers will hate going back to older Cores)

I wouldn't say abandon, but rather parked for the last few months. Moreover, when it comes to FahCores, it depends on the dataset/research type.

In an academic setting, 'parking research' for a year is going to impact their career (Promotion/Tenure/etc.) If they are not allowed to resume with older Cores (a4, a7, 21) they may have to abandon their existing data. I am unclear if Core_21 would work with CUDA, but if it doesn't, it will be very unpopular on Nvidia cards. Core_a4 would be unpopular on CPUs starting with Sandy Bridge, Core_a7 with CPUs starting with Haswell.

I suppose it is possible that Core_21 could be restricted to AMD, and the old CPU Cores restricted to old CPUs, but the researchers have liked fast computing previously.

There is no chance that the researchers will favor the volunteers over their own careers. And the researchers fund and administer this effort.

If running older cores is "unpopular" with some users then excuse my language, but tough shit. It's science all the same. If people get salty because finishing projects means running slower cores, then they're kind of missing the point.

Though would it not make sense to adjust the points to reflect the scientific value of getting the projects finished despite them being slower to compute? That seems like it would be good all around.

Frogging101 wrote:Though would it not make sense to adjust the points to reflect the scientific value of getting the projects finished despite them being slower to compute? That seems like it would be good all around.

This may or may not happen. There is precedence for both in the past. For example, as an incentive to get people to move to the V7 client and process A4 projects, there was a bonus added. 10% more points as I recall. That bonus was eventually removed when enough people upgraded from the older V6 client, and as I recall people complained.

MeeLee wrote:Apparently the world had the worst version of covid. The newer strains are less aggressive (though more contageous), and possibly work like a vaccine (in that most people just get a mild form of flu, and at the same time build up resistance to the heavier strain of Covid).

Unfortunately not. The new version in the U.K. spreads faster than the version in the U.S. or most of the world.
And the newer South African version is even worse than that.
https://news.yahoo.com/south-african-sc ... 14602.html

The scientists are anywhere from mildly to seriously worried about it. No one really knows how the vaccines will handle it.
I started putting more hardware on Folding (and other COVID projects) the last few days in the hopes that they could deal with it.

MeeLee wrote:The main issue with Covid right now, is mass production of the vaccine.

World-wide, that's a true statement. In the USA that's not true yet. We're failing to inject people as fast as the vaccine is being supplied. (Hopefully, that'll be remedied soon.)

Only the politicians are suggesting that we've conquered COVID because we have vaccines. The medical opinions are looking at a minimum of many months before that can considered to be true ... as significant percentage of the public receive their jab.

But how do you know how it will mutate?

It already has if you would pay attention to the news.

chabgood wrote:

But how do you know how it will mutate?

It already has if you would pay attention to the news.

Other corona viruses consistently have mutated.

glad1us wrote:But how do you know how it will mutate?

Also, as I read their descriptions, they are trying to find parts of the virus that don't/can't change much and still be a coronavirus. So that is why I like this project. It could fill in where the vaccines, which may be more specific, leave off.

Of course, entirely new viruses can appear too. It is a continual arms race at this point.

bruce wrote:

MeeLee wrote:The main issue with Covid right now, is mass production of the vaccine.

World-wide, that's a true statement. In the USA that's not true yet. We're failing to inject people as fast as the vaccine is being supplied. (Hopefully, that'll be remedied soon.)

Only the politicians are suggesting that we've conquered COVID because we have vaccines. The medical opinions are looking at a minimum of many months before that can considered to be true ... as significant percentage of the public receive their jab.

I'm afraid politicians are more or less the same all around he world... Here in France, as you may have read, injecting a significant part of the population may last for decades considering the present pace. Guess what, our president has found the solution : McKinsey, the well-known strategy consultancy @ 3/5k$ per day has been hired to provide him with a so-called "international benchmarking" on the subject.
In other words, for those who would not be familiar with this kind of intellectual swindle, the objective is to obtain an extremely expensive "independent" paper which says you've done the same as the others, and got similar results, so you're responsible for nothing. It's been a sadly common practice for years in business, and now it's infecting public policies.

So let's keep folding, scientists may, with our modest help, avoid the disaster the world economic and political leaders would certainly provoke with such stupid ideas ...

Gnomuz wrote:So let's keep folding, scientists may, with our modest help, avoid the disaster the world economic and political leaders would certainly provoke with such stupid ideas ...

I know, it proves the old adage: If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself.