Slashdot Mirror


Folding@Home Reports Success

msheppard writes "This Article describes how the folding@home distributed computing project is reporting that they used the data processed on client machines to "predict the folding rate and trajectory of the average molecule." Too bad Seti@Home hasn't had a hit yet."

6 of 325 comments (clear)

  1. They could work on the screensaver version by jeblucas · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's not exactly overwhelming. They have alpha-trace, ball and stick, wireframe, and most interesting (I guess) is space filled. This big blob rotates about once every second, and these two static images sit at the bottom "provided by COSM" and a bad "Folding@home" graphic. They look ugly. Plus I'm not too anxious to let the static images sit on my LCD screen overnight. (Please don't respond with a torrent of "u ID10T, u w0n7 hur7 ur scrn!!!!" --Call it voodoo.)

    SETI@home has much nicer graphics, albeit, a much dumber purpose. I'll stick with folding@home, but I wish they would pretty the damn thing up a little--at least on the Mac OS X platform.

    --
    blarg.
  2. Re:And so what if SETI did get a hit? by Suppafly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Amen. If you are going to use your spare cpu cycles for something, apply them to a good cause. Besides if you study much on the SETI project, they look at a very limited range of data of the odds of finding anything interesting are exponentially worse than you'd even think. At least the various folding projects and the think project from intel and other medically related go towards good causes where every bit of data helps the cause.

  3. People hate to see computers sit idle by jason99si · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think what drives people to use these clients is simple. I have heard several "technically adept" (read: geek) friends state that they simply hate to see their computer sit idle.

    They have paid for the hardware, paid for the bandwidth, paid for the electricity. It should be doing SOMETHING. Even if it is just displaying flying toasters.

  4. Re:And so what if SETI did get a hit? by the+gnat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    By the time Folding@Home or Genome@Home actually produce data useful enough to lead to medical cures, your wristwatch will be powerful enough to fold proteins in seconds. Don't confuse a nifty theoretical exercise with experimental science. Neither the technology nor the methods are sophisticated enough for this to be of any help to people with cancer etc. I wish someone would come up with a project that actually produced useful biological data with distributed computing. BLAST@Home, maybe. Doesn't sound nearly as sexy as protein folding, I guess.

    (You're still right about SETI, though. What a freakin' waste.)

  5. Re:And so what if SETI did get a hit? by Zathrus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hint: People can use their own spare CPU cycles on whatever they like

    Sure they can. That's not in question. But the theory behind the distributed clients is to avoid wasting CPU cycles and to do something useful.

    The point of the OP was that SETI@Home (and, frankly, RC5 crack searches) are osteniably no better than having the CPU cycles spinning anyway. Projects like Folding@Home, Genome@Home, and UD Cancer Research can provide a real, proveable benefit in both the short and long term. Mathematical projects like GIMPS and prime number searches do so as well, although my personal opinion is that they're not as valuable.

    Use your CPU cycles however you like. Hell, don't run a distributed project at all if you don't want to. All that's being asked is to consider how to actually use the spare cycles effectively if you're going to join a distributed project.

  6. Sigh... IP? Anyone? by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've read the Folding@Home FAQ looking for information about what they plan to do (from an IP standpoint) with the information they get. The "answers" they provide are pretty vague on the details.

    Unlike other distributed computing projects, Folding@home is run by an academic institution (specifically the Pande Group, at Stanford University's Chemistry Department), which is a non-profit institution dedicated to science research and education. We will not sell the data or make any money off of it.

    Ok, they won't make any money off it, but who might? Who owns any patents? What actually is done with the data? And the non-profit bit tells me nothing. The Vanguard Group is a non-profit too, but that doesn't mean they aren't interested in money. (Vanguard is owned by the investors, hence non-profit, but not really) Just because it is a non-profit institution doesn't tell me much. Universities are non-profit but they make a ton of money off of IP. They can do whatever they want but before I commit my processor cycles to helping I'd like to know specifically what I'm helping.

    The FAQ goes on to say:
    Moreover, we will make the data available for others to use. In particular, the results from Folding@home will be made available on several levels. Most importantly, analysis of the simulations will be submitted to scientific journals for publication, and these journal articles will be posted on the web page after publication. Next, after publication of these scientific articles which analyze the data, the raw data of the folding runs will be available for everyone, including other researchers, here on this web site.

    So the data is going to be available. How? What "levels"? To whom? For how much? Just saying it will be published in journals tells me little. What else will be done with it? Who stands to benefit from the data? (aside from the obvious)

    Basically I want to know and am not impressed with their answers. I'd like some candor when it comes to something this important. With SETI@home, who really cares? That won't affect my life. Folding@home might.