If geeks love it, we’re on it
You found the friendliest gaming & tech geeks around. Say hello!
ardichoke said:Some of my coworkers crunched the number and found that to keep your average home PC running 24/7, it only costs about $0.60 in electricity per day. That comes out to about $18/mo. per computer. Of course that would fluctuate based on your hardware but given that I've been running 1 desktop and 1 laptop and my highest power bill so far has been approx. $70, I'd say that number is probably about right (keeping in mind, of course, that the computers aren't the only thing in my house eating up juice). I look at the money I spend as a contribution to charity Cliff, since I don't really give to charity otherwise with the exception of donating old clothes and whatnot to Salvation Army.
Cliff_Forster said:I guess thats the challenge. Would Stanford be better off with a monetary contribution from every concerned folder? Would it enable them to build a better more efficient supercomputer? Less wasted energy not to mention less required bandwidth to process the calculations over the internet?
Leonardo said:Yes, it certainly is inefficient running hundreds of thousands processors distributed across the world, but it gives us a chance to directly contribute, to do more than mailing a check or pulling out the credit card. We are real players. We control machines that contribute directly to basic research. For me, it is doubly satisfying, as I get to participate in a charity by means of a hobby I love.
clifford_cooley said:worlds least efficient supercomputer per watt Lets not put down a worthy cause when there is so much wasted energy in watching movies and sports broadcasting. Is there really any need in me listing more inefficient unworthy projects. What is the power consumption in creating and viewing one movie? I do love watching a good movie but seriously which would we likely benefit from most? Honestly I can't answer whether we would benefit from Folding. I can only hope that my contribution will someday help. As for the movies, seriously don't make me laugh by saying we really need them.
clifford_cooley said:If you don't want to fold then don't but stop pointing a finger at a worthy cause when there are so many other things you can point at first that are not worthy. If you can prove that folding is not a worthy cause then I will listen. Until then I will be pointing my finger at everything else that is simply Entertainment and not a worthy cause of power consumption. Sure lets live without folding. Lets live with the prospect of never finding a cure. Lets point a finger at Stanford for using prebuilt PC's that does not require their full attention simply because they have chosen to use PC's that are less efficient. Thats right say no to finding cures, say no to watching movies, say no to living under AC. Just how much are you willing to live without before you decide you are living Environmentally Friendly? Where exactly is this line drawn? Cliff I admire your wish to be environmentally friendly but I have only known you for a short time and have only seen you question Folding and not any other projects or ideals that we have grown accustomed too. Perhaps there is allot I have missed.
Cliff_Forster said:_k_Thats all I'm asking, a real discussion. I'm not some meanie that wants people to die. I'd almost like to see someone talk me into joining the team.
Cliff_Forster said:but I'm wondering if folding at home is an inefficient way to do it.
Tim said:What has happened with some of the previously large scale folders we used to have here, like Technocrat and Jonshandbrake? They used to do a lot of points, and now it's virtually nothing.Layoffs/downsizings and no more access to the computers that used to fold? Sold the folding farm and went on to other things?
Icrontic — Home of the Big Beef Burrito since 8-8-2000, fool.
A Short-Media community © 2003–2013.
Powered with <3 from Vanilla & WordPress.