Just out of curiosity, are people actually running out of work? I mean if you opt in for all projects if your selected projects don't have work, are people still running out? I don't pay that much attention but my stats seem more or less in line with their 40 day history, although they do tend to be pretty erratic.

If Ripple does cause a huge influx of new crunchers though, a better question is how long is the giveaway likely to last, since we would have to assume most if not the vast majority would disappear once it was over.

That's something IBM should really be discussing with them since the word is clearly getting out. Things like this tend to accelerate at an increasing rate and go hyperbolic. However it doesn't make sense for the staff to plan for a huge increase in project work if the volunteer force is likely to evaporate after a few months.

On the other hand, it makes a lot more sense if it looks like it will go on for a much longer period. And that's something Ripple Labs can help with in terms of how they allocate XRPs. It would only require a little bit of communication and cooperation.

Plus with the redesign of the website and IBM's renewed commitment to WCG, it might be an excellent time for a joint promotion of the work we do here. However it would require a greater commitment of resources and a more accelerated time table for project launches than what we're accustomed to.

Cool charts man, thanks . Given how long I've been here, I should really know some of this stuff. I can be such a slug.

Well, at least it looks like the growth in the number of active users has begun to taper off - for now at least. I guess that's both good and bad, depending on how you look at it.

Even so, I can't help thinking that this giveaway is going to continue to attract people and that provisions need to be made for that depending on how long it's expected to last. But I supposed that's also probably information that is available somewhere and I just don't know where to find it.

I've been assuming that Ripple Labs has other channels for distributing their XRPs and isn't relying solely on WCG. The Computing for Good home page doesn't really say and I didn't see anything at Ripple.com, but IDK. If the plan is to give away 55B XRP just on WCG and they are parsing a maximum amount out per day, it might be a good idea to plan for a substantial increase in the number of active users - sooner rather than later.

Yeah, of course - unless after 2 weeks there's only sporadic work and people see their XRP credits start to dry up. Then all of the people responsible for that spike in productivity wander off and/or start to complain about not having any work units to crunch - and rightly so I would add.

I mean, putting this as diplomatically as possible, it's hard for me to understand why it's so hard for WCG to "sell" free computer time to researchers. The type of processing power that's on offer here can only be approached by supercomputers so I'm really mystified as to why there aren't projects beating down the door. Time on machines like that is expensive and grant money, especially now, isn't easy to come by. There have to be hundreds of potential projects that have the scope and breadth that could provide at least several months worth of work if not more and yet it seems as if we have to beg researchers to use our services. Frankly, it doesn't add up.

But aside from that issue, even if you can whip through a project in a couple of weeks, the whole point of any enterprise is predictable growth. Sudden unexpected growth can be as damaging as none, probably worse since you can at least survive even if you don't grow. Of course different rules apply to charities like WCG. It will survive regardless, but that's not the point. The point is that even if people come here for the giveaway, hopefully some will see the value of the work being done and want to stay, just like many of you did. That works a lot better if things go smoothly.

It should have been obvious from the context that what I meant was any organization that has certain goals. Obviously a charity isn't an enterprise in the corp-speak sense. And if you want to get technical WCG doesn't deliver any research, it delivers cpu cycles. Research consists of publications in peer reviewed journals and the expertise that goes into designing the experiments and studies those publications are are based upon. Everything else is a fairly mechanical process. That doesn't mean it isn't just as essential, but a lab tech running a centrifuge isn't a researcher any more than of us are.

As for having a project wait 4 years for something, you seem to make it a habit of using ridiculous strawmen to try to make indefensible points and frankly it's getting tiresome. But if you ever actually want to debate an issue, do please let me know.

98% [196 proof] is I'm told the highest 'possible'. Chemistry and physics. Beyond that it would not be alcohol anymore. The highest I know is Austrian Stroh Rum... it's when you feel your esophagus wants to escape your body.