ANONYMOUS

Fred · 2016-03-07, 16:30

I understand that individuals (in their account settings) can leave their Public Name blank, and appear as ANONYMOUS in the "Top X Reports". My question is if those who run Prime95, but didn't enter an associated "account" username when installing it, also appear on the reports as "ANONYMOUS"?

For example, I noticed "ANONYMOUS" in position 2 of the top LL producers report (http://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_ll/). Is this an individual who just wishes to remain anonymous, but clearly has a stable of resources dedicated to the project? Or is it a cumulative tally of everyone who installed Prime95 but didn't associate the install with an account?

kladner · 2016-03-07, 16:43

That is a collective result.

Consider, that this "person" would have a stable of computers which rivals the ~1000 run by Curtis Cooper. It is hard to imagine that someone who is that dedicated to the project would remain entirely unknown. (It is also demonstrable by those who have the means that these contributions come from many users.)

Fred · 2016-03-07, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by kladner

That is a collective result.

Consider, that this "person" would have a stable of computers which rivals the ~1000 run by Curtis Cooper. It is hard to imagine that someone who is that dedicated to the project would remain entirely unknown. (It is also demonstrable by those who have the means that these contributions come from many users.)

So what about position 15 on the same report? Would that then be a dedicated anonymous individual?

kladner · 2016-03-07, 17:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred

So what about position 15 on the same report? Would that then be a dedicated anonymous individual?

You got me on that one. Others will know.

ixfd64 · 2016-03-07, 17:42

I'm guessing the first "ANONYMOUS" profile is the collective designation for unregistered users while the others are users that have chosen to hide their display name.

Dubslow · 2016-03-07, 23:18

There are those who are registered but have decided against a public display name, and those who haven't registered at all. The former each still have their own entries (which is listed as "ANONYMOUS") on the various leaderboards; the latter are all aggregated under the same entry at the top (also listed as "ANONYMOUS"). Thus the biggest ANONYMOUS entry is the sum of all the unregistered users and their collective throughput, while all other ANONYMOUS entries are for registered individuals without a display name.

Basically your final phrase in the OP is correct. (Excellent guesswork!)

Madpoo · 2016-03-08, 00:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubslow

There are those who are registered but have decided against a public display name, and those who haven't registered at all. The former each still have their own entries (which is listed as "ANONYMOUS") on the various leaderboards; the latter are all aggregated under the same entry at the top (also listed as "ANONYMOUS"). Thus the biggest ANONYMOUS entry is the sum of all the unregistered users and their collective throughput, while all other ANONYMOUS entries are for registered individuals without a display name.

Basically your final phrase in the OP is correct. (Excellent guesswork!)

I was looking at something related to the multiple meanings of "Anonymous" for the username just this morning (relating to failed attempts to self-verify work).

It occurred to me that a better way to list these "registered but no public name given" users would be to use "Private" instead of "Anonymous". After all, from the server perspective we can track their contributions since they do have a unique user id, so they're not really anonymous in that way.

As for the actual "Anonymous" collective, yeah, they're all lumped into one big pile of users, although if they're connecting via Prime95 there is a CPU guid in the local.txt file, and contributions from a specific machine can be tracked. So... full disclosure there.

Fred · 2016-03-08, 01:50

Thanks for verifying. It would be nice to see the individuals listed as Private Vs Anonymous, just for clarity sake.

I have to confess, watching my position climb on the list has become a new obsession. Although contributing as much as curtis will never be possible, top 5 on the LL list is do-able in 1 a year or so. Understanding that #2 (anonymous) isn't an actual person gives me strange solace.

0PolarBearsHere · 2016-03-08, 08:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madpoo

I was looking at something related to the multiple meanings of "Anonymous" for the username just this morning (relating to failed attempts to self-verify work).

It occurred to me that a better way to list these "registered but no public name given" users would be to use "Private" instead of "Anonymous". After all, from the server perspective we can track their contributions since they do have a unique user id, so they're not really anonymous in that way.

Or change the unregistered users so they show lumped under "Unregistered", and leave the registered but anonymous users as anonymous. :)

Uncwilly · 2016-03-08, 13:50

Be vewy vewy qwiet. We're hunting pwimes!

2016-03-07, 16:30	#1
Fred "Ron" Jan 2016 Fitchburg, MA 1100001₂ Posts	ANONYMOUS I understand that individuals (in their account settings) can leave their Public Name blank, and appear as ANONYMOUS in the "Top X Reports". My question is if those who run Prime95, but didn't enter an associated "account" username when installing it, also appear on the reports as "ANONYMOUS"? For example, I noticed "ANONYMOUS" in position 2 of the top LL producers report (http://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_ll/). Is this an individual who just wishes to remain anonymous, but clearly has a stable of resources dedicated to the project? Or is it a cumulative tally of everyone who installed Prime95 but didn't associate the install with an account?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Work assigned to -Anonymous-	Siegmund	PrimeNet	6	2016-09-06 02:25
Over 18 anonymous debit card	jasong	Information & Answers	5	2010-12-20 03:52
ANONYMOUS issue again...taking my P-1 credit	NBtarheel_33	PrimeNet	3	2009-04-18 02:53
My last LL result was assigned to Anonymous !	Richard Otter	Software	6	2008-12-05 06:17
New assignments set to anonymous	penguin66	PrimeNet	2	2008-11-14 03:58

2016-03-07, 16:43	#2
kladner "Kieren" Jul 2011 In My Own Galaxy! 27AC₁₆ Posts	That is a collective result. Consider, that this "person" would have a stable of computers which rivals the ~1000 run by Curtis Cooper. It is hard to imagine that someone who is that dedicated to the project would remain entirely unknown. (It is also demonstrable by those who have the means that these contributions come from many users.)

2016-03-07, 17:42	#5
ixfd64 Bemusing Prompter "Danny" Dec 2002 California 93C₁₆ Posts	I'm guessing the first "ANONYMOUS" profile is the collective designation for unregistered users while the others are users that have chosen to hide their display name.

2016-03-07, 23:18	#6
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 3·29·83 Posts	There are those who are registered but have decided against a public display name, and those who haven't registered at all. The former each still have their own entries (which is listed as "ANONYMOUS") on the various leaderboards; the latter are all aggregated under the same entry at the top (also listed as "ANONYMOUS"). Thus the biggest ANONYMOUS entry is the sum of all the unregistered users and their collective throughput, while all other ANONYMOUS entries are for registered individuals without a display name. Basically your final phrase in the OP is correct. (Excellent guesswork!)

2016-03-08, 01:50	#8
Fred "Ron" Jan 2016 Fitchburg, MA 97 Posts	Thanks for verifying. It would be nice to see the individuals listed as Private Vs Anonymous, just for clarity sake. I have to confess, watching my position climb on the list has become a new obsession. Although contributing as much as curtis will never be possible, top 5 on the LL list is do-able in 1 a year or so. Understanding that #2 (anonymous) isn't an actual person gives me strange solace.

2016-03-08, 13:50	#10
Uncwilly 6809 > 6502 """"""""""""""""""" Aug 2003 101×103 Posts 2³·7·167 Posts	Be vewy vewy qwiet. We're hunting pwimes!