Poaching

[eepiccolo]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

How will any of the proposed changes to PrimeNet keep non-stragglers from appearing to be stragglers? The existing system does not succeed in that, apparently.

If we have a system that puts a requirement on the amount of time you have to finish an exponent, then no one would be able to make any sort of argument that someone is straggling. Everyone would know that you have a limited amount of time to finish, which I suspect would greatly cut down on poaching. However, I still advocate active ways of preventing poaching, as I have discussed before.

[eepiccolo]

Originally Posted by ET_

I don't agree with you.
I have about 10 PCs working on GIMPS in a travel agency. The agency is working Mo/Fr , 9:00-18:00 or, approximately 40/45 hours a week.
Why should I turn off a 450 hrs/week testing network (that is 2,5 PCs working 24/7) just because each PC alone can't reach the minimum amount of work?

Luigi

Well, that amount of time is equivalent to six hours a day. According to the benchmark page, you could still DC a 10,000,00 exponent within six months as I have advocated, as long as you have at least a 300Mhz Celeron. And if the computers are slower than that, then I would say make them TF.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by eepiccolo

If we have a system that puts a requirement on the amount of time you have to finish an exponent, then no one would be able to make any sort of argument that someone is straggling.

Oh? Some folks have awfully big egos -- "It looks to me like that one will hold up a milestone, so For The Good Of The Project, *I* (who am a God Of The Project, after all) need to intervene ..."

Sometimes my "slow" system's progress is irregular because of varying workload. At times, a simplistic projection of its reported progress (e.g., days-to-go) could falsely indicate that it "won't make its deadline", even though I know that its workload will lighten up soon, allowing timely completion. Will anything in the new proposals help this?

How about simply not reporting days-to-go in the public reports? Show it only in the private reports. That would at least make it slightly less easy for would-be poachers to select targets. If we implement time limits, why would non-poaching non-system-administrating users need to know someone else's days-to-go (or current iteration, or time-to-expire, either - so don't show those)?

I have tried to reply to the poaching comments, and it seems Its broken. There is no copyright infringment with LLR, for proof to EFE.

You cannot monopolize Mp forever!
Gimps relies on brute force, and not much on theory anymore.
We are the work force afterall.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by TTn

Gimps does not deserve 50% whatsoever!
Who the hell do you think you are George?

Read the prize rules carefully. I will receive none of the cash. It is 50% to finder, 25% to charity, 5% to M#39 discoverer, 20% for future prime finds.

[binarydigits]

Originally Posted by TTn

Who the hell do you think you are George?

As for me, I think George is the person who wrote the software. (Most everyone else must think the same since they're not complaining about the prize structure.) No one is forcing you to use his program, or the Primenet server.

Your language is totally uncalled for and deserves to be censored. I would still say that even if I agreed with you.

You dont have the proper concept of lineararity.
Since you dont even know what was said to begin with.

[outlnder]

WOW, I really get 50%???

COOL :D :D :D

[garo]

TTn,
Can you please explain how you got censored? And language like that is objectionable even if you were censored. There is no need to be impolite.
Garo

PS: Xyzzy care to shed any light?

[cheesehead]

What is "LLR"?