On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 12:37:32PM -0400, Nathan Russell wrote:
> I agree that this is unfair, especially given that SETI is probably
> the only project to have more than ten thousand users and NO results
Not that they've told anybody about, at any rate... :-)
___
ussel
Brooks
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mersenne: scientific american
mohk wrote:
> Don't worry, SETI junks million of CPU years...
Unless they actually find something.
C
Most people just find aliens more interesting than primes. One doesn't find
articles about prime numbers in the tabloids.
I didn't join GIMPS for the cash prizes; I'd have a better chance buying a
lottery ticket. But I'm sure many people do join for that reason, probably
the same ones who do buy
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: Mersenne: scientific american
>
> I guess searching a needle in a haystack is less complicated.
>
_
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 05:48:52 -0500, Steve Harris wrote:
>Yes the article does go into great detail re Beowulf clusters, but the
>penultimate paragraph contains:
>
>"An equally important trend is the development of networks of PCs that
>contribute their processing power to a collective task. An ex
xqrpa wrote:
> Article seems to detail tightly-coupled Beowulf clusters, not the sort
> of internet-linked distributed computing we are doing. Have I got the wrong
> article? I'm looking at:
>
> http://sciam.com/2001/0801issue/0801hargrove.html
Thats the one. They do mention SETI@home, but no
LOL ;)
Are we alone?
1) no, we found something
2) dunno :)
I guess searching a needle in a haystack is less complicated.
At 16:10 22.07.2001, you wrote:
>mohk wrote:
> > Don't worry, SETI junks million of CPU years...
>
>Unless they actually find something.
>
>Cheers... Russ
>
>___
mohk wrote:
> Don't worry, SETI junks million of CPU years...
Unless they actually find something.
Cheers... Russ
_
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasa
The reason is quiet simple: SETI is successful and GIMPS is not.
Don't worry, SETI junks million of CPU years while GIMPS solve
complex math. problems (8
>Yes the article does go into great detail re Beowulf clusters, but the
>penultimate paragraph contains:
>
>"An equally important trend is th
while SETI gets all the publicity.
-Original Message-
From: xqrpa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, July 22, 2001 2:43 AM
Subject: Re: Mersenne: scientific american
>Article seems to
Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 10:22 PM
Subject: Mersenne: scientific american
> There is an article this in the new Scientific American on distributed
> computing, but no mention of GIMPS.
There is an article this in the new Scientific American on distributed
computing, but no mention of GIMPS. I feel cheated. spike
_
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ --
Title: Mersenne: Scientific American: Distributed Computing
The April edition of Scientific American has an article on distributed computing:
http://www.sciam.com/2000/0400issue/0400scicit5.html
-Shaun
13 matches
Mail list logo
