Slashdot Mirror
YETI@Home
Dark-Helmet writes "YETI@Home, the search for the missing link? Or something else? Anyway, a very good parody of places like SETI@Home." One thing lacking on this site is Team Slashdot's ranking. We spot strange human-like creatures all the time (usually in our mirrors).
I tried to form a website called ANHIS (the Association for Non-Human Intelligent Species. But I got busy, and the whole thing fell through :(
Judge Pag, the Learned, Impartial, and Very Relaxed
LOL! a Babbage's Difference Engine client that won't run an a mac.
Once installed, the YETI@Home client will not interrupt your daily computer usage. In fact, the application can run virtually unnoticed in the background for years, much like the Libertarian Party.
LOL!
_________________________
I no understanding "yeti"? Is joke? I new to this country. Back in home we not having yeti. Is qake level? Is BSD? I am run BSD at home, if yeti is BSD then is good to have at home.
I no understanding pictures of hair people. Back in home we have plenty of hair people, but none know yeti. Am thinking people are mistaking two? Please to help!!!
Finally, something the furryphiles and the statuephiles can agree on!
just when i think the whole grits thing is starting to get annoying, redundant, and boring, i see this.
I thought of that, but I never got around to it. Well, at least SOMEONE got around to it, it's pretty close to what I had envisioned. Anonymous Slacker
What image capture devices are supported? Some of them. What should I do if my computer detects a yeti? Nothing. The software will automatically connect to our local servers to begin the second stage processing. You do not need to do anything -- it's all completely automated. No, I mean...what do I do about the fact that there's a yeti in my yard! The processing takes many hours per image capture, so by the time the software has gotten a positive ID, the creature is either already long gone, or has kidnapped you and taken you to his lair as his chosen mate.
or maybe not...
For all you people that think that SETI@Home and Distributed.net is actually quite useless, listen up.
I imagine that CPU cycles are actually wordt money, don't they? So wouldn't it be possible to set up some kind of system that runs like SETI@Home but actually does useful work?
You could sell the CPU cycles collected by all those computers, and...here comes the catch...do something useful with the money. For instance supporting The Red Cross, or Greenpeace or whatever.
There could be voting on what could purpose would be supported, and...and...well I see alot of possibilities.
Ofcourse I can also see a few problems...but would it be possible?
Anyone wants to share his opinion on this? Am I being very naive or might this actually be a good idea?
Arno
I wish those people would stop taking pictures of me frolicking naked in the privacy of my own backyard.
Shut up brain or I'll stab you with a Q-Tip. - Homer Simpson
Well, I have no doubt that this is page, (and the post here) are simply in good fun, but the fact is there is quite a bit of evidence that the Yeti does exist. I mean think about it, we all know that humanoid's existed thousands of years ago, why not now? Perhaps is some kid of evolved Neanderthal.
Now, as I recall, Yeti refers to the Asian 'anomaly' and what's seen in north America is called the Sasquatch. As I'm sure you're aware, its not uncommon to find villages in mainland china that have had no outside contact with modern china in hundreds of years, so much so that they develop there own (non-understandable) dialects. How many more villages are out there? And what's to say that they haven't been isolated long enough for more then there language to begin genomic drift?
I've looked at the evidence for this stuff, and you can be sure, there is a preponderance. Now, I'm not going to get all paranoid, and suggest that the government is coving it up (they've got more important things to hide). But I really don't understand why so many people have 'closed the book' on the Yeti and Sasquatch.
Offtopic? It seems that the average Slashdot Moderator is unable to read the article brief.
So lets say that you are payed for your cpu cycles, and the amount of work you get done. This system favors those with more powerful computers.
This system favors the rich, while neglects the poor. It also favors men above women, thus increasing the pay gap. I'm sure someone would sue them, and possibly get a settlement.
I don't think you'd really get that much money off your home computers, for two reasons. Even the baddest ass Athlon box is still way, way behind the really powerful vector-accelerated super computers. Beowulf clusters with 500 or more nodes rarely get in in the top 50 supercomputers.
So, you might make $20 or $30 a month, at current rates. But if everyone was able to sell there CPU cycles on a free market, I doubt you would even be able to make that much. Think about it, how much processing really needs to be done? You probably only own a few hundred millionths of the total CPU power in the world. I just don't think it would be worth it.
[ c h a d o k e r e ]
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Cosm (cosm.mithral.com) is one such place; check out their FAQ.
While not actually working on the level of shared clock cycles, some of the more of a grassroots-oriented efforts include the Peacetree/Food Not Bombs Network. USENET's alt.beograd and some of the spider networks during the Gulf War, Soviet Upheaval & Tiannamen Suare Riots have been important communications relays.
You know what?
Yeti@home is using inferior, close-sourced clients . Reports have already shown that people with "hacked" clients get two to three times better performance. Clearly, there are ways to improve the yeti@home client so that it can make better use of people's CPU cycles! This is a call to the slashdot population - I'd like you all to join me in demanding that yeti@home be open-sourced! Only then can we-
What? Yes, I do see the icon by the story. A foot, kinda like the Monty-Python one.
What do you mean, 'Think about it!'
Oh.
-Denor
Graham
Graham
Linux - Fast Pane Relief
THe YETI@Home parody is quite funny, but it actually conveys the problem of SETI@Home quite well. I don't run the client because it eats resources like anything. I don't have or need a very powerful computer, and I find it unacceptable that the Linux client takes 12MB of memory. Not even Netscape is that resource hungry. Leaving the client running in the background under Windows slows everything down to a crawl too.. it seems to do a crappy job of 'nice-ing' itself.... and if I let it complete it's job, it submits a packet that took 60+ hours to complete, while under Linux it takes only 20 hours... The 60 hours would seriously do bad things to my average completion time for one block. :) Ok, maybe that's not the point, but I wonder what goes wrong under Windows...
Cheers!
Costyn.
The Official Steve Ballmer Webpage
Fight Spammers!
Hook those puppies up to a 300baud modem and you've got one bitchin' 8bit Beowulf!
and quit using those fake accounts, too!
-- Rob
ftp://128.253.254.56/yeti/index.html
SlashMirror: Where to put files for fellow /.'ers
SlashMirror: Where to put files for fellow /.'ers
This is old news. There has been a YETI@Home at evilinternet.com since mid-1999.
First, it would not be a Homo sapiens neanderthal descendant. Neanderthals were restricted in range to Europe.
Second, genetic drift of humans is excessively unlikely -- languages drift many orders of magnitude faster than genes. The population of humans who originally settled the Americas ("Indians" or "Native" Americans) was separated from Asian populations for at least 10,000 years, and was separated from the European and southern African populations even longer. Many Amazonian tribes have not has contact with other humans of the Americs for as much as several additional thousands of years. But their skeletons, DNA, etc. are for all practical purposes identical to those of Europeans or Khosians which they have been separated from for tens of thousands of years.
Then, given range restrictions for the various great apes, the only reasonably possible ancestors of a "yeti" or "sasquatch" would be Homo erectus, which ranged the temperate and tropical Old World; or an offshoot of the ancestors of the orangutan, the only non-human great ape of Asia.
In both cases, the odds of one successfully making it to the New World are as close to zero as imaginable. There are no existing non-human apes of any kind in the Americas, nor have any discovered bones or fossils of any non-human apes ever been discovered. Sasquatch, given the lack of any possible ancestors or any identifiable remains, must be considered an utter fantasy.
The Yeti is mildly more possible, due to geographic proximity of Homo erectus and the orangutan to the proposed habitat. Again, however, there is no fossil evidence, skins, skeletons, or other direct evidence that it or any ancestor of it exists or existed.
In short, the "preponderance" of evidence is the same that there is for aliens and the same that there was in Victorian England for faeries -- stories and some anomalous but circumstanital bits of evidence. The faeries were proven a hoax; I suspect the others are as well.
Hello, international friend.
/. reader comments during the time between the user's refrigerator door opening and the time the light comes on to scan comments and adjust the threshold to a level that assures no comments with the words "hot grits" will be seen.
I understand your pain and confusion. "Yeti@home" is a parody of the American desire (dare I say NEED) to make everyting do something at all times. It is a bit of an obsession with us, because we want to be #1 again, and to do so we must charge blindly and patriotically down every avenue that will let us overcome the lead cureently held by The Republic of Gates.
Perhaps if you visit these similar web sites, you will gain an understanding:
http://www.spaghetti@home - the client offered at this site steals unused time between microwave oven beeps to create a tasty pasta salad.
http://www.betty@home - in the black screen time between channel changes on your TV, searches a tape in your VCR for the famous lost Flintstones episodes.
http://www.confetti@home - like yeti@home, this client feeds video from Times Square in NYC to your computer, but this client uses the idle time during "Server Error 425" messages to scan for bits of paper left over from New Year's eve and directs Legos robots with brooms to clean them up.
http://gritty@home - this site is on every slashdotter's bookmark list; a heavily modified IRC client is scripted to search
I hope this helps you, international friend. I tell you this in hopes it will increase world harmony and peace.
My metamoderation cancels your moderation
No I don't beleive in faries, however I get a bit touchy when I hear someone say anything has been PROVED not to exist. Sorry guys you can't prove the inexistance of anything, only the inprobibility.
Little Brother, watching the watchers
The Hall of Statuary
The Medusa Realm
Studs in Stone
"flesh" is for people who enjoy TAKING rather than giving. I consider these people selfish, people who consider partaking of females and gratifying themselves, rather than thinking about what's best, long-term, for the female. Some of us are happier just knowing that the female exists, and we want her to continue to exist and be able to be herself without being forced to react to the world, rather than just fulfilling sick carnal sexual desires like MOST of the people in the world.
Here's something I wrote about it once to one of the statuephile message boards.
After years of wondering, I think I've figured it out.
But it's rather hard to explain.
I've been meaning to try to write it out in an essay form that actually make sense, but I'll try to sketch it out here.
For me, it's about glorification of the (female) human spirit. The spirit is a beautiful thing. It fascinates me. And as with other non-physical things, such as God, we can see it in the clearest and purest sense when we are NOT seeing evidence of it, but simply know that it's there.
What is a person? Look at a female. She's many things. She's every emotion she's ever felt, everything she's ever done, everything she has the POTENTIAL to do and feel and accomplish. She is every facial expression she has ever made, every time she's ever cried, everything she's ever seen, everything she's ever experienced. She is what she is, what she has been, and what she has the potenial to be.
But, look at what we have. People, who are so much more than what we see, are running around in bipedal bags of goop & blood & guts called a physical body. They're running to and fro and living hectic lives and chasing after their goals and dreams. The spirit guides the body, the spirit is reflected on the face of the body, and in the body's actions, and because of the interlink between the body and the spirit, it's hard to tell where the body ends and the spirit begins, or where the spirit ends, and the body begins. In this active state, it's hard to see someone as a complete person, a single person, a sum of all that they are. We see what she's doing now, but we don't know what she was doing yesterday, we see what sort of mood she's in, but we don't know the bredth of her mind. Being forced to interact with the world, she's not able to be her entire self. She's not able to spend all of her time just being happy of who she is, or on an even lower level, being happy JUST EXISTING.
I consider it wrong that women have to live this way. They should be able to be who they are, all of who they are. I consider actually being alive in an animate body to be the REAL bondage, the real captivity. It's sad that women must grow old, visit Wal-mart to purchase feminine hygeine products, pay taxes, etc. (but usually not in that order). By extending themselves into the world rather than into themselves, they're robbing both themselves and the world of their full potential. They are changing too fast to truly observe the beauty of their souls as it was meant to be observed.
Enter a way of quantifying the spirit. Quantifying isn't the word I'm looking for, because quantifying implies numbering, grading, or labeling. But I can't think of any better word no matter how hard I try. When a woman is turned to stone, she is no longer reacting to the world except within herself. Instead of DOING, she IS. She exists in a more pure form.
So why do I like turning women to stone? Simply because inside the statue exists the entirity of the woman. Her entire spirit, her entire mind, her entire potential, her entire being, exists within a single, static container. And that's the key. We see the statue. That is the body, one expression of her being. But I know that SHE is within the statue, in a state of completeness, free to be who she wants and think what she wants. And knowing this, I can truly see the beauty of her spirit. The world is a better place because a complete person exists within it. A person who is as free as any person in this physical world can ever be.
(And then I touch her butt.)
www.brains4zombies.com
Scott Neanderthal, the press-manager describes the Yeti-Aibo as a one that "fetches the Yeti".
No longer will you have to place videocams all over your backyard to catch that elusive Yeti. The Yeti-Aibo is a custom tailored Aibo with the state-of-the-art motion-tracking and pheromone detectors. Downloaded with the lastest YETI@Home client, the robot dog actively scouts out and tracks down that elusive creature known as the Yeti.
"You can customize the Yeti-Aibo to range over only your backyard, or the whole forest. You can set your preference to find only male or female Yeti's or both. You can even get it to invite the Yeti home to dinner."
"Cool, now I will never need those Cams to track the Yeti again!" says Sasquatch enthusiast, Scott Lowbrow, one of the many hundreds of enthusiasts invited to the press-conference. "I can use it to spy on my pretty neighbor next door."
Sony anticipates selling one million units of the Yeti-Aibo within the next three months.
I believe the word you are looking for is "you're", not "your".
Elvis @Home? Imagine millions of computers, all
searching for Elvis. We're guaranteed to find him, and then we can end the rumors of his death by causing it.
In fact, the application can run virtually unnoticed in the background for years, much like the Libertarian Party
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
seti at home is cool
-I go to Rice, so figure out my email address
CNN Entertainment story here.
The MPAA is at it again! Yet another injunction has been filed against 2600 on 26, Jan. 2000. This time to stop LINKING to sites with DeCSS.
However, you CAN 'explain away' by demonstrating that the causes of the belief in 'x' at no point relied on the existence of 'x'; if you can demonstrate that the origin of the belief in Santa Claus is fully explained without recourse to the existance thereof, you have effectively 'explained him away:' the belief in his existence is no longer necessary to explain the belief in his existence.
For things like Santa Claus, unicorns, and fairies, that they don't exist is actually *part* of their feature-list. They have, for example, through selective breeding, bred a goat with a single horn in the middle of its head. Is it a unicorn? Most of us believe that if you genetically engineer a unicorn, it isn't a 'real' unicorn because it fails of one of the tests of unicorness - i.e., it exists! So instead of proving that at no point a creature with characteristics of faeries ever existed, it is more sensible and more persuasive to demonstrate that the belief in fairies is completely explained by causes A. B. and C. (The encounters with early pre-Celtic european cultures, hallucinagenic drug use, documented hoaxes in the 19th century, etc.)
cow?
you are merely viewing a bug in slashdot's code. The bug makes it appear as if I replied to a comment, when I actually replied to a reply of that comment (that happens to be -1...below your threshold in all probability). Please see http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=00/01/28/23242 03&threshold=-1&commentsort=3&mode=threa d&pid=11 to view the actual sequence of events.
Duh....
t m
The yeti is a rare species of Himalayan bear that lives above the treeline, according to the great alpinist Reinhold Messner.
http://www.parascope.com/en/articles/yetiBear.h
http://www.tibet.ca/wtnarchive/1998/10/6_6.html
Besides, how can "The Wild Man of the Forest" be a monkey? Hello, People, wake up!!!
One other false positive: furry, unkempt Linux programmers wandering out in the backyard to do routine maintenance on the camera.
Here in Eugene, OR, we have scores of treesitters, and they have the ideal location for helping with yeti@home. To wit: They live in some of the oldest growths of forest in the Pacific NW; they stay in the forest 24-7; they have names like "squirrel" and "sequoia". Further info: http://www.efn.org/~redcloud/
I do what the voices on my console tell me to do.
During beta testing, we did try running the YETI@Home client on an AIBO. Unfortunately, the little fellow promptly lifted his leg (surprising, given the AIBO's rather limited range of motion) and showered our main server with a fragrant stream of unidentified yelllow fluid. He did not respond to voice commands, and thus I had to smack him silly with a rolled-up copy of "Boardwatch". [1]
He also infested our office with those infernal chip-with-plastic-googly-eyes-glued-on-it "novelty computer bugs" that one usually finds in bulk at the CompUSA checkout counter.
One of our interns dropped him off on the steps of the local Metreon. I'm sure he'll find a loving home with some overworked and undergoateed Yahoo! employee, or perhaps he'll be run over by a cab.
Nevertheless, our work continues onward towards its illustrious goal.
-Dr. Sparks, YETI@Home
[1] Go ahead, notify the SPCA, or the SPA, whichever comes first. But keep in mind we know about that copy of AutoCAD13 you "borrowed". (Yes, the one you have so cleverly hidden in that "Traveling Wilburys Greatest Hits" box set on the third shelf).
faerie also faery n., pl. faeries.
1.A tiny, mischievous, imaginary form; a fairy.
2.The land or realm of the fairies.
fairy n., pl. fairies.
1.A tiny imaginary being in human form, depicted as clever, mischievous, and possessing magical powers.
2.Offensive. Slang Used as a disparaging term for a gay or homosexual man.
The part about "disparaging" isn't necessarily true if "fairy/faerie" is reserved for the specific meaning "a long-haired effeminate gay man", as any of these sites would testify.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Phew,
Looks like i just missed the boat, thanks to my clever disguise, yeti@home wont be able to pick me up. (hence the name)
wait a minute... Elvis -- Yeti... hmm.
not sure I notice the difference.
Yeti wear gold lame', don't they?
Even if they don't, I'm certain that Elvis stole his act from them.
All that hip shakin'.
They are lewd, these snow creatures... lewd! I tell ya!
Dammit! Now where's my seconal??
and
Your hypocrisy is dripping out around the edges. You might want to look into that.
Why do you think that the fact that a "missing link" has not been found disproves the theory of evolution? (Yes, it is only a theory. Nobody knows _for sure_ that it is right.) If I lost my watch, then I can't find it, does that mean my watch never existed? no, didn't think. I suggest that your argument parallels the watch argument, and thus is faulty. If you can find positive evidence for Creation, then that's great. Has it ever occured to you that even if evolution has happened on earth, the universe had to be created somehow. I believe that God created the universe, and lets things run from there. I haven't made up my mind on the question of miracles, whether He set up the universe so things would happen the way they are ahead of time, or whether He goes in and tweaks things every now and then. However it works, God is cool :)
also note that God could have created yetis. The truth condition of the evolution theory has no relevance on the search for yetis. The situation now would be the same if the universe had popped into place 5 minutes ago with everything having their current positions, velocities, and internal states (including your and my minds, and the yeti lurking in my back yard :), as it would be if the universe had evolved to this point from the big bang, or if God had at some point in history created everything (with positions and velocities such that the universe would eventually reach the exact state it's in now, of course)
You'll probably be upset to know that I am a volunteer Sunday school teacher every week at my church. (and no I don't try to tell the kids about my ideas about the universe and stuff. It's a bit deep for grade 6 students, so I just stick to the "normal" stuff. (most of the time :))
BTW, I would be more impressed if you had logged in to post that. We can tell you stand up for your views when you don't bother to even identify yourself. You probably realized some idiot would moderate you down, but still. I definitely don't think you should get moderated down for pointing out that creation is a possibility. I suppose you did deserve to be moderated down, since we all know Christ teaches us not to hate or despise anyone, even those who don't agree with us. I think you honestly believe the theory of Creation, and that's ok with me. Argue your point rationally, and I'll believe what I want to believe. I'll let you believe what you want to believe, but I am of course free to propose rational arguments why your position is wrong. (I won't do that here, since I'm sure you've seen many rational arguments for evolution. I choose to merely refute your argument against evolution.)
#define X(x,y) x##y
#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes ,
Just to clear things up, ofc I would want the money to go to charity, DUH.
People beginning to call themselves Greenpeace nowadays?
Err...evolution is a fact, not a theory. The THEORY part of evolution is not about whether or not it occurs (it does - that is fact) but the precise nature or method(s) to evolution (punctuated equilibrium? simple gradualism?). The theory is addressing the hows and whys. The fact part is, well, that evolution happens, period. No likey? Tough toots.
for he fell to the ground with a stumbly lurch,
and he spouted and ranted and started to shout,
"THE X-ISTS ARE COMING! ALL YOU YETIS, GET OUT!"
For "Bob" learned that the Yeti were the original race,
and the humans came later, and there went the place!
They both were created by creatures from space.
The genes of the Yeti to this day survive
in those called SubGenius, those few left alive,
who are different as different as different can be.
Do you think one is you? I know one is me!
(from The Slack FAQ)
Also check the Fobonics Institute, accept no imitation!
I assume you're joking, but if you're not...
Secular humanism is not a religion. If you are referring to a court "decision" to the contrary, the statement in question which grouped secular humanism with other atheistic religions such as buddhism was made in a dictum, or legal footnote, and does not posess the power of law (not to mention that it is totally inaccurate.)
-- Religion is a major weapon in the war against reality.
I've never written FFT code myself, but I know what they are (being a physics + CS student and all.) I have done fourier transforms (not numerical, just integrating sin(n*omega_nought) * f(x,t) (and cos(), and for different n to get the frequency space representation of the wave.) algebraicly) by hand on functions our physics prof for Oscillations and Waves assigned.
:) The no particular order bit was dumb. It probably just runs through the whole data set many times. (It might well do other interesting stuff, and/or have working copies of the data which are that size again, though. I think that's what I was thinking when I posted my first msg.) If it just worked on the first bit of the data, then the next bit, etc. then the kernel would swap out the parts it wasn't using. This doesn't happen, so I assume it dances over its memory space fairly thoroughly. You do agree that the algorithms they use require this much memory to process data that size, don't you?
You are correct that my argument was a bit fluffy, hehe
#define X(x,y) x##y
#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes ,