Folding Forum

Was this just a way to get people crunching then throw the non BIGADV WUs in there with them to get them done quicker? I dont understand it, everytime someone says something about it we get a reply "well they all have to be done"

Wouldnt it be better to utilize the 8 core or more machines for BIGADV and let the quads and duals do the others? Seems to me like it was just a normal stanford tactic, bait and switch. I questioned this long ago and was told that you all where happy with BIGADV and it would continue, I like a lot of people bought several 8 cores rigs for this.

Now Linux BIGADV is broke, we have to run the windows in wine, half the WUs are not BIGADV, whats going on? I am about ready to switch projects...

You would think a place like stanford could get this working, and working correctly....

road-runner wrote:Was this just a way to get people crunching then throw the non BIGADV WUs in there with them to get them done quicker? I dont understand it, everytime someone says something about it we get a reply "well they all have to be done"

Wouldnt it be better to utilize the 8 core or more machines for BIGADV and let the quads and duals do the others? Seems to me like it was just a normal stanford tactic, bait and switch. I questioned this long ago and was told that you all where happy with BIGADV and it would continue, I like a lot of people bought several 8 cores rigs for this.

Now Linux BIGADV is broke, we have to run the windows in wine, half the WUs are not BIGADV, whats going on? I am about ready to switch projects...

You would think a place like stanford could get this working, and working correctly....

You have a valid complaint, but the way you address it puts people off.

And quads and duos can't complete Bigadv WUs before the deadline, so those aren't stealing any WUs. But considering the points incentive, I'm sure a lot of people are just like you, and built 8 core systems specifically for this. You are competing with people just like yourself.

As I recall, PG is or is about to publish results specific to these bigadv projects, so no, this was not bait and switch, and not a trick to get big iron folding normal WUs. And I'm insulted that you would make such defamatory accusations about such a worthy project.

I'm pretty sure this was addressed already in another thread, so I'm going to ask a mod to post a link, or merge the duplicate topics.

Seems to me like it was just a normal stanford tactic, bait and switch.

I'm insulted that you would make such defamatory accusations about such a worthy project.

Appearance is the same thing as reality.
The only way to avoid an appearance of impropriety is through transparency and accountability.

In one specific case that road -runner addresses=BIGADV;

1. PG did initially state that it was a limited test case.
2. Subsequently it was characterized as a long-term beta/permanent client.

At this point, if the WU were going to be in short supply, or the specific project was going to be completed, anticipated dates and time lines should have been issued.
If the current lack of WU is only due to glitches, again, a description of the corrective action and time line for completion is owed the donors.

I know you will respond that these time-lines and communications of corrective actions are impossible, because they won't know how hard the problems are until they find them.

However, when this position is taken, you should not at all be shocked that donors question the motivation behind unexplained changes.
It is not a surprise, it is a certainty.

No, my position is that this information was already made available. So this is not a lack of info on which to make up a conspiracy theory. Just a lack of diligence in keeping up to date with project changes. Do your homework.

7im wrote:
You have a valid complaint, but the way you address it puts people off.

And quads and duos can't complete Bigadv WUs before the deadline, so those aren't stealing any WUs. But considering the points incentive, I'm sure a lot of people are just like you, and built 8 core systems specifically for this. You are competing with people just like yourself.

As I recall, PG is or is about to publish results specific to these bigadv projects, so no, this was not bait and switch, and not a trick to get big iron folding normal WUs. And I'm insulted that you would make such defamatory accusations about such a worthy project.

I'm pretty sure this was addressed already in another thread, so I'm going to ask a mod to post a link, or merge the duplicate topics.

I said let the quads and duos do the others, meaning let them do the other WUs give BIGADV to 8 core or more.

Also you are correct about the way things are addresses puts people off, that is exactly my point. I and other people are being put off for problems not being addressed. Lets get the BIGADV to the 8 core or more machines, lets get the linux client fixed, the servers seem to be working right this minute...

Yes, a single sentence post was made regarding the suspension of the Linux client.
This is not an explanation.
This is not an assurance of rectification.
This is not an assurance of timely or diligent action.

It is oops... that's not working....we'll get back to it when it is fixed..........Whenever...

There is no need for conspiracy theory.
This cavalier treatment of donors time, and investment is self evident. No further analysis is required.

When donors complain, (Which you and I both know is a certainty) you could take it as an opportunity to improve communication, or as a chance to tell them that they are "lacking due diligence".

As a customer, I always enjoy a sales person telling me that I am at fault for a product not working; that I should have done my "Homework" and realized that it didn't work before I bought it.

These responses are aimed at what?

Guaranteeing that people will quit??????

That's not the same kind of homework I refer to.

And you are not a typical customer. Pretending to be one is not representative of the actual facts here.

Feel free to vent, but don't start to claim a conspiracy when there clearly isn't one.

Feel free to vent, but don't start to claim a conspiracy when there clearly isn't one.

I never did (claim a conspiracy).

All I did was explain why some people might "feel" like it.

Refusal to acknowledge peoples emotions and motivations will not make them disappear.

And you are not a typical customer. Pretending to be one is not representative of the actual facts here.

Road runner certainly is not a typical customer either. 50 million points certainly makes him fall in the 80/20 rule.
When your top customers complain, those generating 80% of you sales for 20% of your effort, you should take notice.

Hopefully, with positive information, rather than "you should know better".

Vent? Hopeless case. trying to exhort positive Customer Service here is like selling bacon in Saudi Arabia.

Let's address road-runner's questions, and not some fictional group of customers you assume to represent.

@ road-runner, YGPM.

Now Linux BIGADV is broke, we have to run the windows in wine, half the WUs are not BIGADV, whats going on? I am about ready to switch projects...

What part of this OP have you addressed?

Good question. I might ask the same of you.

I don't know the answer.
I DO KNOW it is NOT a stupid/trivial/or uninformed question.

You have a valid complaint...

Ya, I said that already.

Well, I'll let Road-runner respond if he was satisfied with the rest of your reply.

Oh wait, he already did:

I and other people are being put off for problems not being addressed.

Not really a subjective discussion, not just semantics. People either get answers to their problems or they eventually become exhausted and quit.

I'm sorry you feel like you don't have enough information about big adv. I think this has been posted in other threads, but perhaps not in a single place. I agree we should have done more to make this more clear. I'll try to summarize it here:

1) There is a problem with the linux core. This is a low level Gromacs issue and isn't obvious how to fix it. If you have any doubts that this is a complex problem, feel free to go to http://www.gromacs.org, get the code, and take a look. it's ~1M lines of code, much of the key parts of it are handwritten assembly. We use it because it is amazingly fast and maximizes donor's output. however, fixing subtle problems is very challenging. This is not like repairing a car of something like that, where there's a standard protocol to fix something.

2) The use of big adv depends on having very big simulations to run (i.e. lots of atoms). This will come and go as time goes on. we are working on rolling out new SMP WUs, but most of them are smaller systems at the moment, since that's what's needed right now. I think everyone would agree that big adv should help push the science and not the other way around, i.e. we shouldn't design science purely to keep big adv fed if it's not useful to our cause. With this said, I am looking to see what can work based on what's going on. In hindsight, it is clear that this should have been stressed more from the beginning and this was a mistake on our side.

If you were here day to day and saw what goes on, I think you'd have a radically different point of view in terms of how all of this works. We're here to push science forward and aren't trying to "bait and switch" donors (there's nothing to gain from that). We're trying to push the envelope and try new things, but in the end, we're here to push the science and that always takes precedence. The day when science doesn't take precedence is the day that we stray from our mission and betray our donor base, so it's something we take very seriously around here.

With that said, we do take donor concerns very seriously as well (hence my post) and we are looking to see what we can do on this one.