Slashdot Mirror
Distributed Computing on Next Gen Consoles
anonymous lion writes "Wired has a story on the need for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 to support distributed computing with a non-gaming purpose. The article goes on to discuss SETI@home, distributed.net, and Folding@Home." From the article: "The next generation of console gaming is going to see a huge increase in machine performance and overall computing power. Already planned for both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 are multiple 3.2-GHz PowerPC processors capable of handling advanced gaming and graphics simulations, along with out-of-the-box internet capabilities such as Xbox Live Silver. With all that horsepower in a machine that is used for only a fraction of a day, we should offer gamers a chance to put these unused resources to good use."
I'm fed up with the idea that sharing is caring. I don't like to share. I don't want anyone using my bandwidth, my CPU-cycles, my harddrive or my bathroom. It's not that I don't have a high bandwidth connection or several idle CPU's laying around, it's just that I don't like the idea of giving when all I want is recieving (i.e. torrent) I say we put an end to this hippiecomu P2P and other distributed services once and for all.
So, there are actually two resources that are available - the first is the computing power, the second would be the heat energy.
I've always thought it was an incredible shame that there are all these electric base board heaters out there that just do that - heat. It seems to my (possibly demented) mind, that it would make more sense to have those heaters consist of processors doing some type of useful calculation.
So, in houses heated by electricity, maybe it would make sense to leave the PS3/XBox-360s on 24x7 both doing calculations _and_ heating the house.
They are, after all, an almost 100% efficient heater.
- Any Day above Ground is a good Day (Michael Rich, 1997)
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!
Oh wait...
"If you decide not to volunteer to the project, there's a higher risk of Lara losing one breast to cancer"
Run program? [Yes][No]
That should do it.
Well, technically you are correct, but that's only because 1/2 is a fraction. Actually, we're at 55% at the moment.
And while I'm personally a supporter of nuclear power I would even think of putting it in the same group of energy producers as wind, solar or water.
That depends on the context. If we're talking about renewables, then fission-based nuclear plants are out. If we're talking about cheap, then solar and wind are out (mind you, in the case of nuclear power, it is only cheap because it's heavily subsidized).
Besides, electrical energy is the most valuable for of energy as it's the most versetile and hardest to create.
Again, it's a matter of context (as I'm not about to get into the "it's impossible to create energy" debate). Take the hydro-electric dams as examples. What form of energy is easiest to get from them, if not electrical? And how do you propose to transport these other forms of energy all across Sweden - building oil pipelines run by horse-powered pumps? Shipping pressurized hydrogen on diesel-fueled trains?
Heat is an energyform that is a byproduct of most other forms of energy transformation. Heating using electricity is a humoungous waste of effort and even if electricity was free it shouldn't be done.
Ah, a man of principles. Even of electricity was free (and presumably generated using all renewable and non-polluting sources as, may I remind you, 55% of our electricity currently is), we should rather burn coal, oil or wood to heat our homes in the winter? Dioxines and greenhouse gases be damned, we have principles to uphold!
Money for nothing, pix for free