When did PrimeNet begin rubberstamping results?

[petrw1]

Originally Posted by garo

October 2008 if my memory serves me.

Okay maybe not "early 2008" but I do have at least 1 dated 2008-06-03.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Prime95

P.S. There is one more option and it is untested. The server can send a code to tell the client to stop requesting work, i.e. shut down.

There is another option. Simply respond with "no work available".

Yes, the client will still keep requesting work and so cause a bit of network traffic, but the CPUs won't be busy and thus the OS might suspend.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

In the days of rapidly increasing CPU power, 5 year old hardware was ancient. Now, not so much, especially not when it's serving a dual purpose.

I hear what you are saying. I hope you hear what I'm saying.

It is fine if someone chooses to spend the money/energy. But, at the same time, someone who hasn't updated their client in over five years is probably no longer "in the game".

And it has been many, many years since GIMPS was actually free. As in, running GIMPS on CPUs/OSs modern enough to not "busy wait" consume extra energy processing, rather than idling.

[retina]

Originally Posted by chalsall

There is another option. Simply respond with "no work available".

So what you are suggesting is the same as saying "FU, you are not welcome here anymore"? Seems kind of rude.

I'll go with petrw1's suggestion instead: "every little bit helps"

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by retina

So what you are suggesting is the same as saying "FU, you are not welcome here anymore"? Seems kind of rude.

No. I'm suggesting that if someone hasn't updated their client in over five years they probably are no longer even aware the clients are online.

Or else they're "borged", and they no longer have access to them, and thus are actually stealing electricity from someone else.

If someone cares enough they can simply update the client, and continue playing.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Or else they're "borged", and they no longer have access to them, and thus are actually stealing electricity from someone else.

This actually triggered an ancient memory in my mind...

Blosser, anyone???

[NBtarheel_33]

Is there any way of measuring what percentage of the current throughput is due to v4_computers?

[NBtarheel_33]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Let's face the truth: a five (or more) year old computer should not be working for GIMPS (unless, of course, it's also acting as a "space heater").

I have to disagree, and in fact, raise the point that you would quite possibly (and perhaps worse, literally) be decimating GIMPS if you were to disqualify five-year-old machines. Eight- or ten-year-old machines, perhaps yes, but five years is too harsh.

There are many businesses still running Windows XP. They are quite happy doing so, although Microsoft's recent proclamation of "final-end-of-life-no-more-extensions-we-mean-it" may force these businesses to upgrade to at least Win7.

I personally have two computers from 2007 running GIMPS, and they do so quite successfully. I have upgraded them both from dual-core to quad-core CPUs, and their RAM capacities have been upgraded to 4GB, and 8GB, respectively. While I might be keen on replacing my personal system with the latest-and-greatest in the next year or two, my parents are quite happy and satisfied with their system. And, really, I can't blame them. Quad-core, 8GB of RAM, and Win8. Why would they want to spend upper-three or lower-four figures to replace a system that does little more than basic office work and daily e-mails?

Ask curtisc how many of his university's computers are five years old. I bet there are a good number. My alma mater still has some of the classic white Dell desktops, circa 2002-2004.

Six LL tests a year from an eager contributor has got to be worth more than nothing from a would-be contributor that is turned away for not having the right kit. Jeez, first we demand registration to the Mersenne Forum, then we start kicking people out for not having the right kit - better or worse, some might start to see us as a wee bit elitist, which is never a good thing for a volunteer project...

[NBtarheel_33]

Originally Posted by Prime95

A year or two ago I changed the server to only assign double-checks. My other options were TF (GPUs are much better at that), and P-1 (the v4 client may not have much memory assigned).

To my mind, there aren't very good options available.

P.S. There is one more option and it is untested. The server can send a code to tell the client to stop requesting work, i.e. shut down.

1. Is there any possibility of inducing a pop-up message on the user's screen that they need to update to v5?

2. Some users have probably provided an e-mail address at registration. Obviously, these addresses are as much as 18 years old, but it might be worth a try to send e-mails out to v4 users, urging them to update to v5.

[NBtarheel_33]

Originally Posted by petrw1

Okay maybe not "early 2008" but I do have at least 1 dated 2008-06-03.

Yes, that's about the time the v5 server went alpha. The October 2008 date is associated with the crash of the v4 server, and the subsequent forced early upgrade to v5. That is why most people would see their first date-stamped results around that time.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by NBtarheel_33

I have to disagree, and in fact, raise the point that you would quite possibly (and perhaps worse, literally) be decimating GIMPS if you were to disqualify five-year-old machines. Eight- or ten-year-old machines, perhaps yes, but five years is too harsh.

OK, I agree my statement was a little too extreme with regards to the age of the machine being the sole deciding factor.

I stand by my statements about the V4 version of the software, however.

This is simply a desire to open the dialog, and come to consensus within the community about what makes the most sense.