| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Support
Forum: Suggestions / Feedback
Thread: Biological science Distributed Computing coming to an end? |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 8
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I just recently got back on the World Community Grid after taking a few months off. I noticed GRID.ORG has closed down and possibly a few other DC projects might be headed that way also after they are finished.
I'm starting to get a feeling in my gut this might be the future of this place as well! Can Distributed Computing for biological sciences be funded and sustained on the longer term(5 to 7 years or more)? And could it constantly be updated, upgraded, refined with current technologies moving at such a rapid pace? I think distributed computing could be in it's prime a few years or more from now. It would be a shame to see it disappear or cut short before then. Maybe, my recent worries aren't warranted? Thanks for response. |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Well, FAAH and HPF2 are scheduled to run thru the end of 2008 and think to have read that WCG is planning projects for 2009 as well.... They have to, as it takes a long time from proposal to development and launch. The more successes to celebrate, the more the support will remain to keep running.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Quantum computers are still a long way off. With our computing power here rivaling Blue Gene's (not taking into account the quorum), and FREE I think distributed computing will be around for a while longer
 |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Many grid projects have been set up with a very limited goal in mind. So when the project is done, the whole thing is shut down. In order to get enough members, those projects have often spoken in vague and exaggerated terms of their long term aims, giving the impression that the project will be around a lot longer than anticipated - so the shut-down comes as a surprise to some.
Other projects have been victims of their own success. If they get a lot of contributors, a project estimated to take 5 years can be finished in 6 months. grid.org is a special case. The entire project was intended as an advert for United Device's grid product. They failed to provide the resources to run a successful grid. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Maybe, my recent worries aren't warranted? Rosetta@home is a successful university-funded BOINC project. Folding@Home is a very successful university-funded distributed computer project (though not on BOINC). The real problem is keeping David Anderson funded to continue developing BOINC. I think that as long as there is enough usage, David will continue to be funded. The WCG is developing into the major showcase for BOINC. With all the projects we intend to run the next 2 years, David should continue to have a good case, so I do not foresee any insurmountable problems this decade. Still, the budget is the Achilles heel of distributed computing. We always have to be wary. Lawrence |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I'm not entirely sure how BOINC is funded - I think they get most of their funding from SETI@Home and various NSF grants.
----------------------------------------WCG, of course, is solely funded by IBM. If BOINC ever needed bailing out, I'd expect WCG to step up - but they are just fine for the foreseeable future, and WCG's contribution to BOINC is likely to be in the form of code and security auditing. edit: Let's not forget BOINC is open source. Even in the event that BOINC could no longer support any full-time staff, the project would live on. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Jul 19, 2007 3:14:36 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I found these last two sentences of Scripps' 1st FAAH paper interesting:
----------------------------------------Despite strong growth in computing power we can anticipate for the foreseeable future, high-throughput experimental methods and growing libraries of potential ligands generate a range of potential experiments that dwarf even these resources. Techniques supporting the judicious selection of informative structures and ligands will need to grow apace. [Edit 2 times, last edit by Former Member at Jul 30, 2007 9:22:41 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi esoteric17,
Another point. Our next Cancer project will be analysing the data output from an experimental high-throughput lab instrument. If this turns out to be useful, there may eventually be a lot of labs trying to corral enough computing capacity to make their shiny new lab instruments useful. We may not be capacity-constrained by the end of the 21st century, but the next few generations will see ever-greater need for computers. Lawrence |
||
|
|
|