Admittedly it is entirely my own fault because of the way I play, running rebuilders and quakers 24 hours a day. However I do find foldit uses more bandwidth than I would like. Is all the information collected by foldit strictly necessary and does anyone else feel the same way?
I find that Bytes received by each client (updates from the server every one minute or so) have increased dramatically since September 19th (since the influx of new players maybe) even on a idle client (not running any script or build-in action).
This will A) restrict how many clients I will be able to run overall (and my possible contribution to Foldit), B) have me rethink what I want generally to do with my available bandwidth and still keep my internet usage under control (i.e. monthly billing).
I would like to suggest that the updates from the server be reviewed and adjusted to lower this usage footprint.
Thanks.
You can work offline - but it will become evo when you log back.
You can block foldit client from internet after you enter puzzle - but it will kill chat, you cant load recipes, you cant share your work and client will eventually crash. It will also not update your score on server.
More transfer on more players it is only because of chat.
All your steps are send to foldit central for analysis. This can improve rosetta algorithms.
Hi Rav, thanks for you attention to this problem…
I am not talking about uploaded data (like all stuff sent to foldit central for analysis). I am talking about « downloaded » data « from » the server to my PC.
I think it is related to all the updated Scores of each player being downloaded to my client(s). (Maybe the data is « all scores for all players » and the client filters what is to be shown.) One thing is sure, this data is sent to all running clients even if chat does not work on 2nd, 3rd … clients. The download is still there!!!
I am just asking if someone can have a look at the code and improve (reduce) the downloaded part.
Having known about this program/"game" for apx 10 minutes after seeing it on Fox News and visiting the website. This seems to be a giant LIE with good intentions. You waste your time playing with this thing when in actuality it requires nothing from you at all. Just your CPU bandwidth and your internet bandwidth to send the data it has computed to a mother server and receive a new block of instruction for what to compute next. Basically they are taking many computers and chaining them together to make one huge supercomputer. Thus, decreasing the time that it would have taken to "crack" the code they were trying to decipher. The technology for this has been around over a decade. Now don't you feel smarter? lol
Hi max - there is a program called Rosetta@home which you cannot interact with and which uses your computer and bandwidth - it is run by the Baker Lab as well.
foldit is different in it's purpose and use - if you look at the blog articles you will hopefully be able to see the benefits of human interaction as described by the scientists.
They would be unlikely to go to so much effort on the 'game' if the same results could be achieved using Rosetta.
Hola and Ciao to all :-)
Thank you very much for having taken the time to make an account so that we can all benefit from your 10 minute "expert" opinion. As spmm has noted, you are misinformed.
Since you've opened the account - why not do the tutorials and play the game to find out what it really is?
I'm assuming that this Rossetta software is proprietary and not open source. So I will leave it there as I am not a computer programmer. Anyway, best of luck to you in selling your new found data to drug manufactures who will bankrupt the end consumers for the rest of their long lives. Chow
Again maximus81 -
It would be great if you stuck around to find out what foldit is about, instead of assuming things that are not true. A little research on your part would go a long way toward educating your assumptions.
:-) happy folding!
I have never found it uses too much. I do however only use one client at a time.
I used to have a small data cap and I would be lucky to have hit two thirds of it.