Dpc Responds

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-31-2005, 04:27 PM
DDTUNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bloody_Sorcerer

docking time is definitely not a decent way to judge anything; i have an average docking time of 7 minutes 58 seconds, but only average 26 candies a day. Yesterday, my machine was on all day doing pretty much nothing but crunching (a bit of background use, such as surfing the net, and a few VMs running) but I only did 59 candies, which would imply an average docking time of 25 minutes. not all is as it appears.

Docking time is the average time it takes to complete a candidate. The more candidates a node has completed since it was created, the more accurate the average docking time is. If you turn off D2OL or the computer for 10 hours, it does not affect your average docking time. For example, my node 117891, which completed 3 candidates since it was created on March 20, 05, using a total docking time of 44 mins 54 secs, has an average docking time of 14 mins 58 secs. Put another way, the average docking time is directly related to the processor used, as we know D2OL production is mainly determined by processor type and MHz speed. It can be affected short term by the candidates you are assigned to crunch, but over the long run it is quite stable for each machine.

You can increase your average docking time by using your computer more for other functions while D2OL is running, or by slowing down your cpu, etc.

BUT YOU CANNOT DECREASE YOUR AVERAGE DOCKING TIME TO BEYOND YOUR SYSTEM'S CAPABILITIES.

If you have further questions regarding this topic, please feel free to ask.

DDTUNG:cool:
12-31-2005, 04:47 PM
[XC] moddolicous

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDTUNG

A P4 3.0 without HT crunches an average of 95 cands per day, or 4 cands per hour, giving average docking time of 15 minutes. A P4 3.0 with HT can do up to 150 cands per day running two instances of the client, giving 75 cands per day per client, or 3 cands per hour per client, resulting in average docking time of 20 minutes. Since most of your 150 machines were P4 3.0, you should have average docking time of between 15 and 20 minutes, depending on what proportion had HT capabilities. Since you said that the 600 other machines you used for the finish were mostly slower, you would have an even higher average docking time. But the D2OL stats page show your average docking time as 12 mins 03 secs. How is that possible?

With 150 P4 3.0 rigs your daily production should be between 14,000 and 22,500 cands, again depending on the proportion with HT. Since your last dump was 75 days before Dec. 25, how is it that you only had 700,000 cands instead of 1,050,000 to 3,375,000 cands, without even including the other 600 machines that you used later?

And how do you explain that with so many machines of varying speeds, that you were able to have dumps that ended with 0 not only on consecutive days, but every hour, and actually every 15 minutes? Did the slower machines all finish the 2,000 cands?

I will stop here for now because I think there is enough for everyone to form a conclusion.

DDTUNG:cool:

Someone is really good at math. U wanna help me with my math homework DDtung. I got some proofs with your name on it.
12-31-2005, 05:01 PM
mad mikee

Spoken like a true student

:rofl: - thanks I needed that (after dinner entertainment :D)

Quote:

Originally Posted by moddolicous

Someone is really good at math. U wanna help me with my math homework DDtung. I got some proofs with your name on it.
12-31-2005, 05:04 PM
DDTUNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by moddolicous

Someone is really good at math. U wanna help me with my math homework DDtung. I got some proofs with your name on it.

Yeah, I always enjoyed math. Especially the QED part.:)

DDTUNG:cool:
12-31-2005, 05:34 PM
[XC] moddolicous

Thats my only good subject (that and spanish). Got a 94% in it this semester, so not doin bad. Just thought we needed some laughter in this serious thread.
12-31-2005, 05:53 PM
pythagoras

Anyone need a maths teacher?:D
12-31-2005, 07:33 PM
[XC] serlv

Quote:

Originally Posted by pythagoras

Anyone need a maths teacher?:D

Why, you got a theory?
12-31-2005, 07:39 PM
DDTUNG

:rofl: That's a really good one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by serlv

Why, you got a theory?
01-01-2006, 02:28 AM
DDTUNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by RoyalFlusher

Soepkip was 'supposing' and there were some flaws in his reasoning.

I suppose they managed it on the way I described.
After registering the client they stopped the client BEFORE it downloaded its workbuffer. Then they copied it. Once copied on the computers where they mirrored it, they gave it access to the internet to download the workbuffer. After they ran out of work on those machines they copied the resulQueue.dat files to USB-Stick and deleted the original ones. Then they dowloaded again a workbuffer. And so on...

I see. With first 150 P4 3.0 machines scattered all over the place, and later adding 600 slower ones for the finish, that must have been some operation. Perhaps they can enlighten me as to how to do it efficiently. I run less than 50 machines in less than 3 locations and I have a hell of a time, even with groups of them in small local networks accessible through one computer in each location.

Oh one other thing, to be enable to enable internet access to download the initial and subsequents work files, the operator(s) of this scheme must have some system administrative rights, correct? Then why doesn't he(they) do the operation through the network? Without administrative rights they would have to sneak into the office every 3 weeks or so and finish the copy/download operation before the security guards discovered them? Or do it during office hours when the persons using those machines were on lunch or toilet breaks? And for 150, then 600 machines? How would they log on or gain internet access? Perhaps our own conran_maranan, who is a systems administrator and used to run around 75 P4s for XS until he was transferred to a bigger division with higher security standards, can find the time to come here and chime in.

The plot thickens.:)

DDTUNG:cool:
01-01-2006, 02:48 AM
lv_dicedealer

DDTUNG , the cows have lost a lot of respect across the net regarding this whole issue. I'm sure that DC'ers across the net are now questioning a lot of their production. More damining evidence will come to light I have a feeling !
01-01-2006, 02:53 AM
DDTUNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by lv_dicedealer

DDTUNG , the cows have lost a lot of respect across the net regarding this whole issue. I'm sure that DC'ers across the net are now questioning a lot of their production. More damining evidence will come to light I have a feeling !

Thanks for your opinion.

I am only interested in finding the truth about this particular incident with D2OL. I am sure that the majority of DPC DCers are good honest people, so it is not my desire to damage their reputation. Just want the truth.

DDTUNG:cool:
01-01-2006, 11:20 AM
lv_dicedealer

Quote:

Originally Posted by lv_dicedealer

DDTUNG , the cows have lost a lot of respect across the net regarding this whole issue. I'm sure that DC'ers across the net are now questioning a lot of their production. More damining evidence will come to light I have a feeling !

Wow was I tired when I typed this!

It was supposed to refer to ICA_cows not DPC as a whole group.
01-01-2006, 01:07 PM
emphasis

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDTUNG

BUT YOU CANNOT DECREASE YOUR AVERAGE DOCKING TIME TO BEYOND YOUR SYSTEM'S CAPABILITIES.

there is a really simple way to decrease that time!!!

Just set your systemclock back for a year when client is running. On that way i first had a average docking time of -16 min (now its 3min, see here).

Yes i know that is TSC, but thats the same
01-01-2006, 02:24 PM
Fr3ak

Why do you set your systemclock back then?
I grew up with PCs and you guys do a lot of strange, uncommon things...

Legal weed in Netherlands eh? ;)
01-01-2006, 02:27 PM
DDTUNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by emphasis

there is a really simple way to decrease that time!!!

Just set your systemclock back for a year when client is running. On that way i first had a average docking time of -16 min (now its 3min, see here).

Yes i know that is TSC, but thats the same

And why would one want to do that?:confused:

DDTUNG:cool:
01-01-2006, 02:34 PM
ParaNoiMia

I guess he wrote it to tell you that the average docking time is not a solid figure to find out if someone has cheated or not, don't you think ?
01-01-2006, 02:41 PM
trakslacker

sure, but if setting the system clock back is the only real way to drastically decrease docking time, and since it has been shown that ICA_COWS really could not have thier listed docking time given the comps they listed, then can they give a logical explanation as to why on earth they would set back the system clock on hundreds of PCs?
01-01-2006, 02:42 PM
Entity_Razer

the only thing I can think of is winter savings time.... but that just doesn't add up.
01-01-2006, 02:44 PM
DDTUNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by ParaNoiMia

I guess he wrote it to tell you that the average docking time is not a solid figure to find out if someone has cheated or not, don't you think ?

So you are supporting the theory that they set back the clock on a significant number of computers, purportedly in a large company or institution, which caused a decrease in average docking time?

I've heard a few stories in my life. None can beat this one.

DDTUNG:cool:
01-01-2006, 02:49 PM
DDTUNG

Quote:

Originally Posted by Entity_Razer

...but that just doesn't add up.

ER, that is my line.:)

DDTUNG:cool:
01-01-2006, 03:16 PM
shmaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDTUNG

So you are supporting the theory that they set back the clock on a significant number of computers, purportedly in a large company or institution, which caused a decrease in average docking time?

I've heard a few stories in my life. None can beat this one.

DDTUNG:cool:

Excuses are just being grabbed out of thin air now... it's starting to get very pathetic and lame.:cow:

MOD EDIT shmaa is expressing his personal opinion.
01-01-2006, 03:42 PM
DDTUNG

Allow me to suggest a way for the ICA_COWS to prove their innocence. Why don't they send the resultQueue.dat files to Charles Beckius for verification? Since the files were saved and then copied over for the dump, surely they still exist on the computers where they originated.

DDTUNG:cool:
01-01-2006, 03:52 PM
saaya

did they just not send them yet or did they say they will never send them to charles?

this is kinda distubring... a project to help humanity... gets cheated on for fame... sad

MOD EDIT: saaya is expressing his personal opinion.
01-01-2006, 04:34 PM
Fr3ak

Quote:

Originally Posted by saaya

MOD EDIT: saaya is expressing his personal opinion.

ROFL thats great. Nice one Victor ;D
Entertaining stuff in this thread.
But as long as we have no hard proof, we can't tell if there is anything wrong or not.
I personaly don't believe in those tails, but thats only my 2 cents.
So it's "in dubio pro reo" I guess.
But just a hint for the future: There would have been no accusations if you had played the game like everyone else. Nobody would have had any doubt about the output of ICA if there were 1 or 2 node(s) per pc.
Have a look at the answers you gave us and decide for yourself if they are plausible or not.
I am using D2OL to help science, so that maybe one time people can benefit from it. Now Charles has to waste unnecessary resources to determine whether your "method" was legit or not.
01-01-2006, 04:52 PM
DDTUNG

Fr3ak the hardproof is right there in the D2OL database and logs. Someone just has to take the trouble to extract it. Or the honorable ICA_COWS could just present the resultQueue.dat files and save everyone the trouble.

DDTUNG:cool:

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page