This appears to be both a hardware and software issue but anyway here we go:

I'd like to open a discussion on Volunteer Computing.

There are a few excerpts of definitions below plus links to very detailed definitions.

I just became aware of BOINC and am going to try out helping a project.

Do you think there are any drawbacks to this process for an individual PC?

Does the usage compromise your own performance and or the longevity of your system?

Is there any obvious reason not to participate in such projects?

I must say I'd trust the University of Berkeley just on its reputation. Would you?

Volunteer computing is a type of distributed computing in which computer owners donate their computing resources (such as processing power and storage) to one or more "projects". It is distinct from grid computing, which involves sharing of managed computing resources within and between organizations.

Volunteer computing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Volunteer computing

What is volunteer computing?

Volunteer computing is an arrangement in which people (volunteers) provide computing resources to projects, which use the resources to do distributed computing and/or storage.

•Volunteers are typically members of the general public who own Internet-connected PCs. Organizations such as schools and businesses may also volunteer the use of their computers.
•Projects are typically academic (university-based) and do scientific research. But there are exceptions; for example, GIMPS and distributed.net (two major projects) are not academic.

Several aspects of the project/volunteer relationship are worth noting:

•Volunteers are effectively anonymous; although they may be required to register and supply email address or other information, they are not linked to a real-world identity.
•Because of their anonymity, volunteers are not accountable to projects. If a volunteer misbehaves in some way (for example, by intentionally returning incorrect computational results) the project cannot prosecute or discipline the volunteer.
•Volunteers must trust projects in several ways:
◦The volunteer trusts the project to provide applications that don't damage their computer or invade their privacy.
◦The volunteer trusts that the project is truthful about what work is being done by its applications, and how the resulting intellectual property will be used.
◦The volunteer trusts the project to follow proper security practices, so that hackers cannot use the project as a vehicle for malicious activities.

The first volunteer computing project was GIMPS (Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search), which started in 1995. Other early projects include distributed.net, SETI@home, and Folding@home. Today there are over 50 active projects.

VolunteerComputing - BOINC - Trac

BOINC

BOINC

Choosing BOINC projects

Choosing BOINC projects


...

I found this recent comment on-line:

People think they are doing a great thing by using BOINC, however:

1) They are brute force projects. Instead of understanding the underlying processes of what they are attempting to solve, instead they generally just understand the top level, and test against it for candidates that might work.. Messy work.

2) People don't realize that it actually costs quite a lot to run Boinc. If they donated the money they spent on electricity and the lower life span caused by running their computers 24/7, things would probably move a lot quicker. Its more efficient to create a cluster of servers in a central location which are dedicated towards the tasks.

3) CPU's speed to power consumption ratio is increasing rapidly. Wait 3 or 4 years and it will take only a handful of desktop computers

Despite the good intentions of BOINC, I think resources would be better spent elsewhere. Some examples may be:

1) On efficient renewable energy technologies. Then we can run all the research we want with less cost, and less problems.

2) Funding low-level research instead! Brute forcing a bunch of molecules to see if it solves Alzheimer's is one thing. But understanding it completely may prevent it occurring in the first place. Furthermore, you are less likely to end up with thousands of drug candidates which aren't targeted at only Alzheimer's and so cause other (possibly unknown) side effects.

Plus followup:

"Instead of understanding the underlying processes of what they are attempting to solve, instead they generally just understand the top level, and test against it for candidates that might work.. Messy work."

well, you know, there is a theory that some stuff cannot be computed by nothing else but brute force. e.g. NP class of problems.

there is also so-called computational irreducibility theory that for sufficiently complex system the only way to learn something about them is to run (simulate) them.

"more efficient to create a cluster of servers in a central location which are dedicated towards the tasks."

neither you nor I have exact numbers, so we can only speculate on this.. i think "lower lifespan" effect is neglible for electronics, so equipment costs is almost fully offset.

and as for power, typically BOINC is run in idle time (when computer should be on anyways), and it is not like in idle time computer requires no power (PSUs are not very efficient). so you have two options -- spend 70W energy and do nothing, or spend 150W and do something useful. in this case using shared computers would be more efficient from power perspective unless you can do same amount of work with 70W, which is unlikely to be the case. (they do not buy cheapo low power computers for datacenters.)

and there is also space costs -- it will be zero in case of using shared computers and non-zero (it costs some money to build datacenter) in case of dedicated.

"3) CPU's speed to power consumption ratio is increasing rapidly. Wait 3 or 4 years and it will take only a handful of desktop computers"

this way we can wait eternally.

I've been running DC projects in my spare cycles for years, starting with the SETI project, the precursor to BOINC.

I found this recent comment on-line:

People think they are doing a great thing by using BOINC, however:

1) They are brute force projects. Instead of understanding the underlying processes of what they are attempting to solve, instead they generally just understand the top level, and test against it for candidates that might work.. Messy work.

2) People don't realize that it actually costs quite a lot to run Boinc. If they donated the money they spent on electricity and the lower life span caused by running their computers 24/7, things would probably move a lot quicker. Its more efficient to create a cluster of servers in a central location which are dedicated towards the tasks.

3) CPU's speed to power consumption ratio is increasing rapidly. Wait 3 or 4 years and it will take only a handful of desktop computers

Despite the good intentions of BOINC, I think resources would be better spent elsewhere. Some examples may be:

1) On efficient renewable energy technologies. Then we can run all the research we want with less cost, and less problems.

2) Funding low-level research instead! Brute forcing a bunch of molecules to see if it solves Alzheimer's is one thing. But understanding it completely may prevent it occurring in the first place. Furthermore, you are less likely to end up with thousands of drug candidates which aren't targeted at only Alzheimer's and so cause other (possibly unknown) side effects.

This sounds like somebody whining because they got a smaller piece of the pie. I don't think these critics understand how distributed computing works.

Brute force? Umm, isn't that why you toss problems at the world's most powerful computers? Only instead of using VERY expensive and limited mainframe and super computers, they rely on millions of smaller computers running parallel processing that cost them nothing. In the case of BOINC, note the B stands for Berkeley - a tax payer funded university. How is saving tax payer money bad?

instead they generally just understand the top level

This is simply an ignorant opinion about ALL the researchers, the people, and not about the data being collected and analyzed. So apparently, this guy does not like how a project is being run, so therefore he assumes all DC projects are run by idiots. Not the case.

lower life span caused by running their computers 24/7

This is simply WRONG! There is no evidence to suggest running a system 24/7 shortens the life span. In fact, many long time hardware technicians (including yours truly) personally feel that running electronics in a constant operating environment MINIMIZES damage caused by the different expansion/contraction rates of matter in mated dissimilar materials (as used virtually all semi-conductive devices) during frequent heat up and cool down cycles. Over time, these stresses can and often do form microfractures, fatigue, premature aging of the device, and eventual failure. I note this is one of the primary reasons sensitive electronics equipment is maintained and operated in environmentally controlled facilities - so there are no wide swings in ambient temperature and humidity conditions. A system that runs 24/7 stays at a fairly constant temperature. In environments where the ambient temperatures of the facility are low - meaning a wide swing from cold to fully heated - condensation can actually become an issue in some cases - not good.

Its more efficient to create a cluster of servers in a central location which are dedicated towards the tasks.

This is ignorance talking. Who is going to pay for this cluster of high-end servers, the facility, the power to run these computers? Who is going to pay for the IT specialist to maintain these servers, the OS and software running on them? Total efficiency of a project is measured by MUCH more than just electricity consumed.

Wait 3 or 4 years and it will take only a handful of desktop computers

Yeah, right.

For the regular home computer user, there is no monetary incentive to run any DC project. But it can be fun, there is often a active community of crunchers that talk and share experiences and have friendly rivalries. It makes good use of older hardware that would otherwise sit in a closet or be tossed in a landfill.

For me, I keep my systems on 24/4 for a couple reasons - with security being one of the top. At night, while I am asleep, my systems scan themselves for malware.

For me, searching for cures for cancer by donating idle time on a computer gives me a warm fuzzy, while not hurting anyone.

I have installed BOINC. As you have experience Digerati may I ask if it is best to only run one project?

Choosing BOINC projects

Also I haven't looked through the details of each project yet but do you recommend any being more worthwhile than others?

I am more interested in astronomy and mathematics rather than medicine but should searching for ET or the largest prime take precedence over medical research?

BOINC is extremely flexible, and I have never had a problem running with single or multiple projects. Right now, I'm just looking for ET but the World Community Grid is nice too.

Should searching for ET take precedence over medical research? Probably not, but if ET were discovered, that might spark a united effort to explore space, and that is always accompanied by advances in many other technologies. So it is still a good thing.

Here is a link about installing BOINC on all different operating systems. The BOINC How to Guide (Win,Linux,MAC) - XtremeSystems Forums

Here is a link about installing BOINC on all different operating systems. The BOINC How to Guide (Win,Linux,MAC) - XtremeSystems Forums

Such a very amazing link!

__________________
Watch The Karate Kid Online Free