What sophistry.

Could you explain why, please?

Do you believe that using X amount of money to provide a guide-dog to 1 blind person could be at least as good as applying the same amount of money to completely fix or prevent this disability to 1000 people?

Of course we should and can take care of all people (if we all share resources with equity), but with the current inequality we must take priorities. My point is that our priorities should be to maximize impact with the resources we have (knowing some people that have lots of resources refuse to share them).

I did not imply. I said "say"*. It could be the case that the impact in terms of CO2 and opportunity cost of energy are really negligible in comparison to the benefits of running it. I really don't know and I would like to. The lack of transparency in this matter is what makes the doubt if I should be a participating member and a promoter of WCGrid to my family and friends. I cannot in conscience be that in these circumstances.

I use some of those (not any cryptocurrency, though). You have a good point: I should ask about the energy cost from my existence in Google Drive, Youtube and Youtube Music to Google!

That "surely" is clearly another fallacious argument, though; just like the one WCGrid made: "The net societal benefit ... far outweighs the minimal additional energy which may be drawn from the otherwise idle devices" without data to backup that claim.

My point is not that WCGrid does more harm than good! My point is that its developers don't care about disproving this!

UPDATE: *to imply that if the case I've portrayed was true, the conclusion would be easy: that WCGrid should not be run.

Well said Sgt. Joe!

Basic research doesn't always look for the "magic bullet", but attempts to winnow out things that would lead nowhere. Once basic research narrows down the possible candidates for further investigation, the results can go forward to laboratory research on actual, live organisums .

What is the potential benefit to society of the post graduate degrees the students involved in these projects obtain?

"I believe it is incumbent upon us to do that search, because the benefits of finding that solution, should greatly outweigh the costs of finding it."

I believe they eventually could, but if that's so clear, why don't WCGrid developers present, however rough, an analysis that shows that that is most likely the case?

"It would be extremely hard to quantify any results in terms of lives saved."

For finding a cure or treatment of a disease I guess not. The people who are able to use it count towards the lives saved. For more efficient solar panels, we can also quantify the pollution averted and there are statistics that show how many people are killed from pollution. Let's assume it is indeed extremely hard. Then, let's set goals and in case we don't get anywhere (in terms of useful findings) in X years, let's pause WCGrid (or at least the sub-projects that are going in a dead end) and reflect.

"You also don't seem to be taking into account that for some of the research done here, there is no cure and the deaths from them can't be avoided. Whereas it's possible to do other things to combat global warming."

Could you please explain what you mean by this?

"Do also remember that there will be a wide range in CPU power efficiency / performance per watt so trying to analyse the impacts wouldn't be simple."

Doesn't BOINC provide those basic statistics to WCGrid? If it doesn't, the points could be a good proxy, no?