Folding@Home in Guinness Book of Records - bit-tech.net Forums

CardJoe · 1st Nov 2007, 11:29

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/11...k_of_records/1

The Guinness Book of Records has now officially recognised the Folding@Home effort as the worlds most powerful distributing network.

Jamie · 1st Nov 2007, 11:38

bit-tech folding team stats

How long before people start to question the additional power consumption and the carbon footprint of all that processing?

Shadow_101 · 1st Nov 2007, 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie

bit-tech folding team stats

How long before people start to question the additional power consumption and the carbon footprint of all that processing?

dam hippies /hugs petrol

mikeuk2004 · 1st Nov 2007, 11:46

Id do it but i has so many issues with AOL limiting me, somedays I cant get a webpage to load. This would kill my bandwidth or would it?? I havnt read much into the folding lark.

Jamie · 1st Nov 2007, 12:10

It doesn't use much bandwidth. The client downloads a small chunk of data and then the processing happens without using the internet.

DXR_13KE · 1st Nov 2007, 12:36

this could be put into gov and school computers....

mclean007 · 1st Nov 2007, 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

this could be put into gov and school computers....

So taxpayers could foot the additional power bill? I don't think so mate

C-Sniper · 1st Nov 2007, 13:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by mclean007

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

this could be put into gov and school computers....

So taxpayers could foot the additional power bill? I don't think so mate

Most school PCs are on 24/7 anyway so there would be a very minimal increase in power consumption.

Bluephoenix · 1st Nov 2007, 15:16

in the US, some companies can actually get a tax break if they devote the non primary processing time to folding@home

the company I'm currently doing part-time design work for actually hooks in the tesla unit it has to folding@home when it isn't needed for its primary job.

the same thing is done with the single Quadroplex, and all the workstations.

DXR_13KE · 1st Nov 2007, 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by mclean007

So taxpayers could foot the additional power bill? I don't think so mate

taxpayers already foot the power bill for stupid things... at least this one is is useful.

Jamie · 1st Nov 2007, 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by C-Sniper

Most school PCs are on 24/7 anyway so there would be a very minimal increase in power consumption.

I think a computer idling will use far less power than a computer at 100% load.

boiled_elephant · 2nd Nov 2007, 00:37

Precisely. And with a problem as huge as carbon emissions, it's less PCs in schools and LAN parties that are the problem, and more...y'know...the entire western world.
Anyone who spouts off at ME about carbon footprints gets a slap with a wet article.

steveo_mcg · 2nd Nov 2007, 10:39

You know what they say, the longest journey an all that.
I seen a comment on this on /. some one calculated the cost of running this on a ps3 24/7 at something like $400. Multiply that by UK energy costs and by the number of computers at schools and this would be an incredibly expensive proposition, surely the better option would be to just shut down school computers when they are not in use and if people want to donate to the system then that's their business.

1st Nov 2007, 11:29	#1
CardJoe Player Character bit-tech Staff Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 7,940	Folding@Home in Guinness Book of Records http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/11...k_of_records/1 The Guinness Book of Records has now officially recognised the Folding@Home effort as the worlds most powerful distributing network. __________________ this is joe's non-bit-tech blog

1st Nov 2007, 11:38	#2
Jamie bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Oxford, UK Posts: 7,620	bit-tech folding team stats How long before people start to question the additional power consumption and the carbon footprint of all that processing? __________________ bit-tech hosted by tsohost.co.uk twitter \| flickr \| xbox live \| last.fm \| moot

1st Nov 2007, 11:46	#4
mikeuk2004 What you Looking at Fool! Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sheffield, UK Posts: 3,047	Id do it but i has so many issues with AOL limiting me, somedays I cant get a webpage to load. This would kill my bandwidth or would it?? I havnt read much into the folding lark. __________________ -\|- Xfire - Mikeuk2005 -\|- Xbox Live - Mike UK 2006 -\|- Playstation Network - Mikeuk2004 -\|-

1st Nov 2007, 12:10	#5
Jamie bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Oxford, UK Posts: 7,620	It doesn't use much bandwidth. The client downloads a small chunk of data and then the processing happens without using the internet. __________________ bit-tech hosted by tsohost.co.uk twitter \| flickr \| xbox live \| last.fm \| moot

1st Nov 2007, 12:36	#6
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,466	this could be put into gov and school computers.... __________________ *Renegade X - 0.40 Release!* <---- CLICK!

1st Nov 2007, 15:16	#9
Bluephoenix Spoon? What spoon? Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Daytona Beach, FL Posts: 936	in the US, some companies can actually get a tax break if they devote the non primary processing time to folding@home the company I'm currently doing part-time design work for actually hooks in the tesla unit it has to folding@home when it isn't needed for its primary job. the same thing is done with the single Quadroplex, and all the workstations.

2nd Nov 2007, 10:39	#13
steveo_mcg What owl? Join Date: May 2005 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 3,975	You know what they say, the longest journey an all that. I seen a comment on this on /. some one calculated the cost of running this on a ps3 24/7 at something like $400. Multiply that by UK energy costs and by the number of computers at schools and this would be an incredibly expensive proposition, surely the better option would be to just shut down school computers when they are not in use and if people want to donate to the system then that's their business. __________________ No boom today, boom tomorrow... there's always a boom tomorrow.