| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Teams
Thread:  Join "MyOnlineTeam" Today - Chapter 23 |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 513
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings
----------------------------------------[Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Jan 20, 2008 11:07:01 PM] |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings I might end up moving back to http://folding.stanford.edu/ They're mentioned in the news more, and getting out there. It would be great if we knew what progress WCG is making. |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Gerald/Blizzie - although I sometimes question and criticise some aspects here, I do think the science is valid and worthy of support.
Sometimes you have to just hold your nose and crunch regardless  |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Gerald/Blizzie - although I sometimes question and criticise some aspects here, I do think the science is valid and worthy of support. Sometimes you have to just hold your nose and crunch regardless So when someone asks me "What do you do?" I can reply "I help find cures for Cancer and AIDS."  |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Interesting. I am somewhat curious what all these results we've been crunching have achieved. The Stanford project seems much better updated and more put-together in general. I'm also kinda thinkin about moving. OBVIOUSLY no disrespect to Keithhenry - you continue to do awesome work and your leadership is fantastic, but I'm somewhat bothered by the bugs and mismanagements of the overall admins (NOT YOU KEITH).
----------------------------------------Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings I might end up moving back to http://folding.stanford.edu/ They're mentioned in the news more, and getting out there. It would be great if we knew what progress WCG is making. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Jan 21, 2008 12:16:12 AM] |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Interesting. I am somewhat curious what all these results we've been crunching have achieved. The Stanford project seems much better updated and more put-together in general. I'm also kinda thinkin about moving. Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings I might end up moving back to http://folding.stanford.edu/ They're mentioned in the news more, and getting out there. It would be great if we knew what progress WCG is making. That's what I came from. I decided to try out WCG and stuck with it for a few months now. The only thing that's bad about Folding@Home is the ugly interface. The SMP client (Duo and Quad only) is text based. Edit: Maybe we should make a thread asking what advancements have been made. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Jan 21, 2008 12:16:22 AM] |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
You mean here or in folding@home? Let me know what you decide Blizzie, you have my email.
Interesting. I am somewhat curious what all these results we've been crunching have achieved. The Stanford project seems much better updated and more put-together in general. I'm also kinda thinkin about moving. Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings I might end up moving back to http://folding.stanford.edu/ They're mentioned in the news more, and getting out there. It would be great if we knew what progress WCG is making. That's what I came from. I decided to try out WCG and stuck with it for a few months now. The only thing that's bad about Folding@Home is the ugly interface. The SMP client (Duo and Quad only) is text based. Edit: Maybe we should make a thread asking what advancements have been made. |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
You mean here or in folding@home? Let me know what you decide Blizzie, you have my email. Interesting. I am somewhat curious what all these results we've been crunching have achieved. The Stanford project seems much better updated and more put-together in general. I'm also kinda thinkin about moving. Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings I might end up moving back to http://folding.stanford.edu/ They're mentioned in the news more, and getting out there. It would be great if we knew what progress WCG is making. That's what I came from. I decided to try out WCG and stuck with it for a few months now. The only thing that's bad about Folding@Home is the ugly interface. The SMP client (Duo and Quad only) is text based. Edit: Maybe we should make a thread asking what advancements have been made. Folding@Home has a text based interface for Duo and Quads. The Pentium's have an option of text based or GUI. Edit: The thing that's strange about them is the repeating of work units. I don't know.. they all seem the same. Folding@Home is just more well known. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Jan 21, 2008 12:27:31 AM] |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
how bad is that text interface? We should ask them if they have a GUI in the pipeline.
You mean here or in folding@home? Let me know what you decide Blizzie, you have my email. Interesting. I am somewhat curious what all these results we've been crunching have achieved. The Stanford project seems much better updated and more put-together in general. I'm also kinda thinkin about moving. Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings I might end up moving back to http://folding.stanford.edu/ They're mentioned in the news more, and getting out there. It would be great if we knew what progress WCG is making. That's what I came from. I decided to try out WCG and stuck with it for a few months now. The only thing that's bad about Folding@Home is the ugly interface. The SMP client (Duo and Quad only) is text based. Edit: Maybe we should make a thread asking what advancements have been made. Folding@Home has a text based interface for Duo and Quads. The Pentium's have an option of text based or GUI. Edit: The thing that's strange about them is the repeating of work units. I don't know.. they all seem the same. Folding@Home is just more well known. |
|||
|
||||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
how bad is that text interface? We should ask them if they have a GUI in the pipeline. You mean here or in folding@home? Let me know what you decide Blizzie, you have my email. Interesting. I am somewhat curious what all these results we've been crunching have achieved. The Stanford project seems much better updated and more put-together in general. I'm also kinda thinkin about moving. Well i came here because of the cancer research and tried to be loyal--but i just dont know---Edit--i was just thinking i spend about two thousand a year here not counting computers--maybe it would be better left in my pocket or my Grandsons savings I might end up moving back to http://folding.stanford.edu/ They're mentioned in the news more, and getting out there. It would be great if we knew what progress WCG is making. That's what I came from. I decided to try out WCG and stuck with it for a few months now. The only thing that's bad about Folding@Home is the ugly interface. The SMP client (Duo and Quad only) is text based. Edit: Maybe we should make a thread asking what advancements have been made. Folding@Home has a text based interface for Duo and Quads. The Pentium's have an option of text based or GUI. Edit: The thing that's strange about them is the repeating of work units. I don't know.. they all seem the same. Folding@Home is just more well known. Here's a very old screenshot. The client still looks the same. This is SMP. I outlined it in red. http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/4538/20070921193347cw9.png |
|||
|
||||
|
|