• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

how should we award points for folding?


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 brokenportal

  • Life Member, Moderator
  • 7,046 posts
  • 589
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI

Posted 06 December 2010 - 11:42 PM


If you click here: http://folding.extre...=&srt=4&t=32461 youll see the Longevity Meme team folders lined up according to who had the most Stanford points this week. I dont see a monthly option though. So how are we supposed to award monthly points then?

Should we use the top folders for the week at the end of each month then?

Also, how many should we award? 12, just a few, all of them? There are only 30 or so folding right now.

While deciding this we want to keep in mind that with out DnaMechanic here updating things at this point that we cant be sure who some of those folders are. So it might take a long time to figure out who the particular folder is at imminst and then award them the points.

Optimally I suggest is that we award the top 5 a grade of points like, 50, 100, 150, 200, and 300. Then award the everybody else something like 10 points. However we might have to consider changing that after trying to track all of those folders Imminst names down for the Imminst points allocations.

#2 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 December 2010 - 04:16 AM

I would only award points to Rosetta folders. Rosetta supports the kind of research we are interested in, while FAH did't, last time I looked.

#3 brokenportal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Moderator
  • 7,046 posts
  • 589
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI

Posted 07 December 2010 - 08:36 PM

The protein folding that fah helps science understand contributes to ageing science. Rosetta says that they venture into more applied science, and thats great, I agree that Rosetta has an edge over fah if we compare them directly. However we have a established and entrenched fah team with a lot of team members, and we have put in a ton of work which has landed us in the top 80 where we have held the position for over a year, (years?) now.

So, while I agree with you in part, it seems best to stick with fah, unless/until somebody builds a Longecity Rosetta team, gets it moving, and convinces all of our currently active fah folders to start switching over. At that time then we could make the points switch.

I just tried finding the top 5 and a few random folders on our team. I could only find some of them because their names there and here arent the same. I tried to find their email contact info through fah to try to find them here but I dont see the way to find their email there.

So unless somebody can tell me how to track down the folders then I dont think we can give them points at this time.

#4 Ghostrider

  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 December 2010 - 07:30 PM

The protein folding that fah helps science understand contributes to ageing science. Rosetta says that they venture into more applied science, and thats great, I agree that Rosetta has an edge over fah if we compare them directly. However we have a established and entrenched fah team with a lot of team members, and we have put in a ton of work which has landed us in the top 80 where we have held the position for over a year, (years?) now.


We may have invested a lot into the FAH project, but just because we did something in the past, doesn't necessarily mean we should continue doing it in the future. It will be very hard for us to get towards the top of their rankings. I imagine most people on this forum have better things to do than play video games all the time. We would be competing again overclocking enthusiast sites where there's a ton of members with powerful systems and not much else in life. :-) Also, FAH skews their points towards GPUs. I've mentioned before that I'm mixed about Rosetta's most recent research focus, but I think that if you're running only CPU, no GPU, best bang for your watts will be with Rosetta which only supports CPUs. One PS3 can gain more points than 10 CPU only systems. Furthermore, Rosetta's a much smaller project (at least for now) than FAH and so we'll be able to make a bigger impact there. I've been contributing points to the Better Humans team. Maybe we can team up with them.

#5 thughes

  • Guest
  • 262 posts
  • 120
  • Location:Raleigh, North Carolina

Posted 31 March 2011 - 06:14 PM

Right now my PS3 folds for folding@home, but my mac for rosetta@home.

The imminst rosetta@home team is dead (no folders). I currently chose the methuselah foundation team, which is mostly dead (4 active folders).

Betterhumans is larger (11 active members) but www.betterhumans.com is under construction, so may not be worth advertising at this point. Either that or they have a transitory web site problem... if that the case they may be the best choice.

Couldn't find a humanity+ team (bad search terms?)

If imminst wants to pick and support a rosetta@home team for those that prefer rosetta@home's research aims (ie. not with the intention of stealing members from the much larger folding@home team for people who don't have a preference), should just pick a good established life extension/transhumanism team and make a stickied post in this forum. Its better (for advertising) to make some attempt to combine efforts...

In fact, a post asking who strongly prefers rosetta@home and who they think imminst should fold for might be useful (but I don't want to step on the longevitymeme team's toes if people think this may be a net loss...)

- Tracy

#6 brokenportal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Moderator
  • 7,046 posts
  • 589
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI

Posted 09 May 2011 - 06:56 PM

If you click here: http://folding.extre...=&srt=4&t=32461 youll see the Longevity Meme team folders lined up according to who had the most Stanford points this week. I dont see a monthly option though. So how are we supposed to award monthly points then?


Does anybody know about this? I wish we had a DNA Mechanic around, thats a good example of every thing that somebody chips in adding up. His folding stats really helped hold up a piece of this puzzle.

In fact, a post asking who strongly prefers rosetta@home and who they think imminst should fold for might be useful


Can you create a poll to this effect, gather suggestions for names, probably Longecity, and then if you find enough support and youll still head it up then we can support you and all the Rosetta supporters in moving it forward.

#7 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 09 May 2011 - 07:11 PM

If you click here: http://folding.extre...=&srt=4&t=32461 youll see the Longevity Meme team folders lined up according to who had the most Stanford points this week. I dont see a monthly option though. So how are we supposed to award monthly points then?


Does anybody know about this? I wish we had a DNA Mechanic around, thats a good example of every thing that somebody chips in adding up. His folding stats really helped hold up a piece of this puzzle.


You could save a snapshot of the current points in excel, and then compare next months snapshot to it.

#8 brokenportal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Moderator
  • 7,046 posts
  • 589
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI

Posted 09 May 2011 - 08:55 PM

You could save a snapshot of the current points in excel, and then compare next months snapshot to it.



I can only see the current weeks point totals at the most. I would have to take a snap shot every week after the specific time the Stanford Updates them.



#9 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 09 May 2011 - 10:19 PM

You could save a snapshot of the current points in excel, and then compare next months snapshot to it.

I can only see the current weeks point totals at the most. I would have to take a snap shot every week after the specific time the Stanford Updates them.


There's a total points column to the right of the weekly points column. Or did I misunderstand ?

#10 brokenportal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Moderator
  • 7,046 posts
  • 589
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI

Posted 10 May 2011 - 12:59 AM

You could save a snapshot of the current points in excel, and then compare next months snapshot to it.

I can only see the current weeks point totals at the most. I would have to take a snap shot every week after the specific time the Stanford Updates them.


There's a total points column to the right of the weekly points column. Or did I misunderstand ?


Im talking about the totals for each folder. In order to see who folded for the last week, (preferably month, but it only goes back a week) I have to check the weekly points, then every person who folded a point or more shows up, and so I mark them down. Preferably though I need to see who contributed a point or more for the entire month. I cant do that though because it doesnt show by the month nor does it show past weeks.

#11 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 10 May 2011 - 01:35 AM

Im talking about the totals for each folder. In order to see who folded for the last week, (preferably month, but it only goes back a week) I have to check the weekly points, then every person who folded a point or more shows up, and so I mark them down. Preferably though I need to see who contributed a point or more for the entire month. I cant do that though because it doesnt show by the month nor does it show past weeks.


To find total points for a folder in the month of May, you would find the Total Points on May 1st and on June 1st and then subtract the two to get points in the month. Does that make sense ?

#12 brokenportal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Moderator
  • 7,046 posts
  • 589
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI

Posted 10 May 2011 - 03:54 AM

To find total points for a folder in the month of May, you would find the Total Points on May 1st and on June 1st and then subtract the two to get points in the month. Does that make sense ?





That might work in that way, Im thinking about it here. Then in that case I would compare the entire list of 150 to the list from a month ago and mark down every one who has had a change in points. Ill look into that and see how it works, or potentially doesnt work. The way we have it set now, we award points evenly across the team for reaching a certain specified new rank, in this case the goal is getting back to 79.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users