Considering the steady decline in public participation, it should be apparent to all but the most obtuse that the present paradigm of anything goes FTW! (as long as one is a member of the fold-it-at-home camp) is failing to achieve or retain new players. But then, perhaps that's your goal?
Forgive the history lessons, but take a step back, and reconsider FoldClub afresh. Rosetta@home, is a crowd-sourcing project, whereby you give up your CPU, and automated prediction algorithms endlessly crunch numbers. The genius of FoldClub, is that you get your hands on a protein and see what you can do with it. This is the whole essence of the 'Komps v Hooman' debate that crops up in chat. Komps are told what to do, Hoomans can always choose. But in order to get you addicted in the first place, there is a competitive element, in that scores get you positions on the board, repeated positions give you global rank. And so, we keep coming back to 'play'. A further development of competition is team play, a casserole of individual approaches and talents.
But, the human element is not as straight-forward, as simply being able to say, 'That bit, doesnt look right'. The way we play, is typified by knowing WHEN to do things, when to rebuild, when to wiggle, when to stop shaking. That only comes with experience.
The development of FoldClub, the new tools that arrive, is an intereting learning curve. In the days before freestyles, we would usually be given Rosetta predictions, to refine. Then as those refinements edged towards a resolution, we'd get a Native guide, to Quest Towards. Then we were given raw Freestyles to work with. As an insight to the way FoldCentral and Rosetta work, these freestyles are the raw material that would be fed into alignment comparisons, then passed to Rosetta, to generate the prediction puzzles, that we were used to. So we had the opportunity to add our human touch, earlier in the process. And we found, that freestyles had their own problems, it would take 2 or 3 days to get even a decent starting structure, and you might get lucky. Or not.
Alignment tools, are just the next part of the Rosetta process that we have been given the opportunity to adjust with our human eye. They are the gift-wrapped head-start that saves us those 2 days of processing freestyles, and they are now far more malleable.
So, does scripting help or hinder the human element?. You might argue from a Purist point of view, that it’s encroached too far into the human part of the game, that our only creative contribution now, is setting up the start-game, before letting loose the uber-meta-super-script to do its magic. You might argue, that we’re simply fulfilling the job-description of Foldit, by striving to replicate a humanised prediction algorithm from scratch. It’s the SkyNet paradox - will we one day fold ourselves out of a job?
The answer, lies somewhere in between. Scripting was supposed to augment Recipes, by giving more range to things you could do. It can automate certain repetitive tasks, it can refine rebuild into a valuable tool of exploration, it cant make the perfect of tea. The danger is, it can turn folders into users. If you choose to play the game, as a point chase, then be a user. Download the highest scoring scripts, build yourself an i-10, and good luck. If you want to be a folder, try to understand by hand, firstly, why you’re doing what you’re doing. The secret to scripting, is yet again the human element - knowing WHEN to run a script. AS BP said earlier, the playing field is a lot more level than you may believe it is.
Speaking personally, I spent 3 or 4 months finding out how things work, to understand why it works. When I felt I had something to add, I joined a team. I’m not a programmer, I use recipes and scripts to automate the dull stuff. I’ve no desire to spark life into SkyNet, I’m a firm believer in the humanist approach. If you care to look Brick, my team has 5 Perpetual Motion Machines. Our achievements are based on hard work, and the experience that it brings. It’s a little petty and disingenuous to suggest that it’s merely down to a few lines of code. If you believe in the magic passport of scripting, Brick, try ‘editing’ your downloaded scripts, and ‘save as’ under a different name. You can then edit the contents to your hearts content. Try building a quake variant library, by varying where you place your bands…
Personally, I think we’re already in a position where useful scripts and recipes, as distilled packets of experience and information, are probably used by the vast majority of players, so the notional advantage is already diluted beyond a competitive edge. As FoldClub continues to evolve, the most important thing to remember is the original message. The biggest weapon you bring to Foldit, is you. Why choose to dilute that advantage, by downloading scripts that other people have written? All you’re doing is playing your game in their way. Take the time, to explore and find your own way.
Charlie
Hello Charlie,
Let me start by saying that, in my opinion, your "2-cents" ranks among the best of the responses to this thread so far, (right up there along with BP's). So much so that I am hesitant to add any further comment, as, in many ways, you've tied up the whole thread of responses to Boots' original post into a neat little package that seems almost complete.
…almost.
The issue I have with most of the responses (my own original response possibly included) is that while Boots' original posting posited the question about "information," somehow, most of what followed subtly became subverted to the question of one specific form of information: …that being "scripts."
Now, while that is a valid interpretation, about which many have strong opinions, and while it is certainly an interpretation deserving of all the attention and response it has engendered in this thread, I believe it is now very important to refocus whatever may remain to be said in this extended conversation to the original focus laid out by Boots in the beginning: the broader topic of "information." In particular, I'd like to broaden "information" to emphasize an almost opposite aspect of Folding from Scripting; Manual Folding Techniques.
Being a player/participant who came to the game only lately (started only on March 19th, 2010), I have quite naturally been "funneled," as have many others, (by timing and necessity as well as inclination) into the "script" game. However, from quite early on, I also began to realize that there were levels of knowledge regarding the game that were, through natural evolution, no longer being taught or emphasized, and that were rarely even discussed, at least publicly, in the chats. After the initial tutorials, "manual" folding seems to have all but been forgotten. I have come to be of the opinion that script-folding, with its easy-to-achieve leaps in scoring performance - which is very seductive to newcomers, (myself included) has overshadowed, and even replaced many crucial lessons and fundamental understandings that are necessary to succeed at a higher level later on.
In a nutshell, I fear that "manual" folding skills are sadly on their way to becoming a lost art. I also perceive that this art is critical to a player eventually maturing into a really great folder, and not just a script runner, and I am increasingly aware with each new puzzle, how much this lack is preventing me from progressing to a higher level of Fold-it success.
While it is a tribute to the game designers that they were able to design the game in such a way that newcomers can begin to do quite well quite soon (by discovering and putting to use all the years of experience and expertise of others, which is encapsulated in the scripts in the public script library), it is also amazing to me that so many of us - myself included - can get such a feeling of accomplishment; of competence; of success; and such a "thrill of victory" - by simply utilizing all this work that was done not by ourselves, but by others.
Eventually, however, the realization must come… "I did not really do this on my own merit." I am merely re-employing through script, the accomplishments and knowledge; the "blood, sweat, and tears" of others' efforts.
And those of us to whom this realization comes, and those of us to whom it is also important to achieve success on our own merits - then face a choice: to either learn enough to begin to be able to succeed on our own merits, or to accept that all of our "achievements" in scoring within Fold-it are largely illusory; not really our own achievements at all.
I choose to learn - as I suspect most if not all of the other new players who catch the bug and stick around - also do.
If I am jealous of anything in this game, it is not that others may have better scripts than I do; it is that I missed out on the beginning of Fold-it, when the True Art of Manual Folding was everything, and the experiential foundations were being laid for today's folding elite.
And so, for me at least, it is not the scripts of the best players which I covet nearly so much as simply their knowledge of and skill - at manual techniques - forged through long hours of study and practice - back when there was no other way.
It is unfortunate for the newer players, that some of the "old guard" are reluctant to teach newcomers more than just the basics of such things. Many are incredibly helpful and magnanimous about helping newbies with low-level, basic Fold-it function questions, but some, when asked a question like "How did you do so well on 'such-and-such' type of puzzle - (where I could get absolutely nowhere)," … become vague if they answer at all. I have even been told in chat that "I'm sorry, I cannot help you - someone on my team is watching." In one respect, this is very sad, that even within a competitive game, an experienced player cannot even answer an earnest question posed by a newcomer with a sincere desire to learn, for fear of incurring the wrath or disapproval of a team-mate. It has the effect of making one stop asking questions at all, at least of that person. However, on the other hand, I must add, I have come to realize, it is also quite understandable in the competitive team environment, to guard one's team's advantage, and I hold no judgment toward that person for doing so. For all I know, no verbal explanation would have been adequate anyway, to convey the knowledge I sought.
So what are we newcomer's - we "have-nots" of old manual-folder experience - to do? Simply resign ourselves to our fate of not having arrived soon enough to garner the same education within the game as the older players? Continue to ask questions of those whom we know must rebuff our inquiries due to team loyalties? Attempt to achieve Fold-it Zen Master competence through scripts alone? (that latter being a contradiction in terms)
What I long for is a Manual Folding Master Class, where the Master Manual Folders may pass on the benefits of their knowledge to the "new guard," in apprenticeship fashion. Now that the game has advanced and progressed so far down the scripting path, these manual skills may not be transmissible/preservable by any other means.
But, I must admit, perhaps this role is inappropriate for ANY player in a competitive arena. Perhaps even attempting to answer a question such as the one I mentioned above really would be inappropriate for any team-member with loyalties and allegiances, oaths and pledges to his or her team. Perhaps this "Manual Folding Master Class" I envision and long for can truly only appropriately be put on by the Developers who are the only ones capable - who are also outside the competition. And by "Master Class," I mean something that goes FAR, FAR beyond the depth and scope of the the current tutorials.
Developers… are you reading this? You may be the only appropriate avenue for the dissemination of this type of information and skill enhancing training. I really believe at this stage of Fold-it's development, it is a cogent question on an important subject, and I would be surprised if there is not a lot of agreement on this out there amongst the newer folks in the Fold-Club membership. With all the new developments, has there perhaps been some omission of valuable training that only those fortunate enough to have gotten in on the ground floor will ever be able to receive?
Let's start with the assumption that the answer to Boots' original question here - ("How much information are we expected to share with the rest of the Folding community?") - is "None." For the sake of this conversation, let's posit it as if it were LAW: "No player shall be expected to divulge to any other player any piece of knowledge or experience regarding the game, especially where such information may profit the recipient to the detriment of the dis-closer."
How then, can the newer players come up to speed with the techniques that so enhance the older players games, but which are now held as closely guarded secrets (and perhaps rightly so) within the individual teams, where sharing of these "secrets" is (perhaps also rightly) considered tantamount to treason? …techniques which are also not being as fostered within the game and it's training as perhaps they once were, due to the evolution of the game, the availability of scripts, and the easy successes that scripts enable.
An Idea: Perhaps there should be a new class of game for which scripts are not even available in the interface; puzzles which can only be affected by manual interaction. Perhaps there should also be a separate scoring division; a separate competition, where only non-script puzzles are scored completely separately; a whole separate arena where players can learn and develop manual skills without being trampled by high powered script folding. This, in addition to a the "Master-Class" folding tutorial would provide both the education and the "training ground" for players desirous of achieving the deeper understanding possessed by the older players; It may even attract the interest of older players as well, who may be desirous of testing their own manual skills against others in an arena that is made level by the exclusion of scripting. In fact, to go a bit further, I'd add that the inclusion within the game of a script-less, manual-folding only competition, would be the key element to the success of any master-class manual folding training that may be implemented - an arena to practice and hone these skills without being blown off the map by scripts.
In my humble opinion, this would be a very good thing which would attract a lot of interest and support from all those in the Fold-it Community who are hungry to increase their folding knowledge and skills, and those who are hungry to re-learn and preserve the manual folding "secrets" of the "old guard" or "elite" folders.
Am I wrong in this thinking? Have I overlooked and/or misunderstood something? Players and developers alike, I'd love to hear your opinions & feedback. Is another level of Fold-it training doable and practical? Am I the only one who perceives a need and a desire for this among the other newer players … and even the old ones? Would it even be Possible to add a "scriptless" game arena to Fold-it that disabled script usage?
Please forgive my loquaciousness… this subject has struck a chord in me that has gotten me quite carried away - that, and perhaps way too much caffeine.
Best Regards, and Good Folding to all
-dimension9
As yet another Contenders member who has been playing Foldit for 1.5 years, here's my perspective:
==> Does my not using long, complex scripts put me at a disadvantage? From my experience so far, no. In fact, there have been more than one case where I've shared tips with others (mostly newbies, but occasionally with veteran players as well if I'm so far ahead in a puzzle that people are jokingly complaining about it), and even then the net effect on my rank is minimal. (The idea is that, if there's a good chance that I'll be passed sooner or later, might as well help the eventual #1 player so that the top solution will have an even higher score and, hopefully, be closer to the native.)
.
.
The tricky part, though, is that tips from manual playing seem to be more difficult to teach– with a script, all one has to do is to share it and have someone else re-download it. A good example of this is Puzzle 165 ( http://fold.it/portal/node/986452 ):
.
.
==> Well, I was later contacted by the Foldit staff about this because my structure was apparently way too close to the native. Clearly, I was very lucky, because there are many possible permutations for swapping two beta strands; and even if I guessed correctly, it is not guaranteed that I would be able to put the protein back together the right way. The ironic part, though, is that the same tactic didn't work quite as well in latter puzzles where I feel that a sheet doesn't look right. In fact, when the same structure was re-released as a quest to the native in puzzle 176 ( http://fold.it/portal/node/986597 ), I only got 8th the second time despite that the native was in the game for copying at will.
Moral of the story:
I found Fold.it by accident, in Rosetta project on Boinc I see strange button :)
I like puzzles, so after download Fold.it eats majority of time I spend on my screen now.
Because I`m home-made programmer scripting pulls me in. I see many ways to simplify/quicken some moves we do in game - thats are scripts for. So I share my ideas, and read as more as I can form others.
ATM I only missing "basics" of manual folding - what type of aa takes place as sheet or helix. I tried to analyze two natives we have atm, but results are not good (see my shared script… or better not :P).
So now in game I use one of template given and tune it - shorter/longer sheet, helix instead of loop etc. If looks good then scripting it.
I think what is set at start, the "original"/manual fold b4 scripting determining final result. Faster PC helps only to try more starting points.
Back to topic: sharing knowledge and scripts is very important. Competition makes it harder :D
I think we need few videos (on youtube for example) witch good comments where we (newbs) see how to start fold.
Also sharing best scoring and/or looking results for closed puzzles would be nice -as target practice ("Oh my! How I missed that!").
More "human language" articles would be nice too.
Interesting arguments given above and I would like to ask those who can write recipes to please share them with the folding community as they improve a protein beyond what would have been possible only a short time ago and that is good for R@h. Otherwise there'd be 2 tier folding: –> the haves and the have nots.
My personal preference is to fold the proteins manually from the start which is a method I adopted when I started out just over 18 months ago. My method is freely available in the German Wiki) but I need the recipes to work on the protein once a certain stage is reached just to see where it ends up and will then work on it manually for a further few hours etc.
I can't write recipes so am dependent on those shared with others. There are no special recipes in my group and only sheer determination, some intuition, a faster computer and lots and lots of my time go into each protein.
So to those who want to guard their script(s) I would like to say: - keep it, I don't need it
and to those who freely share with all of us, I would like to say a big THANK YOU :D
If I write a recipe, I always upload it with default parameters.
I think, there are many similar recipes, but with just small changes.
"Publishing" all, also the derivates, would fill the recipe download section, making it hard to find the originals again.
I guess it would be good to have not only a regular (general) recipe section, but also one per puzzle.
Let's take requests for features to a separate posting or feedback. This discussion is far too interesting and important to get derailed by feature requests.
When I publish a script, it is a way to package the hours that I've spent learning about folding. Some people pass on their knowledge through chat, or wiki postings, either in private or public. I pass my knowledge in scripts. I can't do everything I know in scripts, because the lua features available are too limited, but I can do a lot. My knowledge is enough that it can get someone to about 15 to 30 in rank right now almost exclusively through running my scripts in the right order. (BTW, I can't take sole credit as my scripts also include code such as vertex's bluefuze and co lapse's settle, which I include because there is no way to call their code.)
If someone treats my script as a black box, just running it with no understanding, she will get the rank. However, if you look at what the script does, it points out techniques that acquire points. Most of my scripts use banding in ways that I developed in the early days of folding before scripts existed. Some are techniques that I wanted to do in those days, but were too tedious to do each time. In the description of the script and on the web page, I try to give a general idea of how the script works. If you want to get the exact technique, it is right there in the code.
I am most appreciative when someone else publishes a good script (thanks vertex, co lapse, spvincent, pletsch, madde, rav3n_pl). I define a good script as one that finds me points after I've exhausted everything I know. It gives me a new technique. Why didn't my scripts find those points? I look at the code and see what those scripts do, and I learn something. Sometimes I can take what I learn and form new scripts that use those techniques in new ways.
Do I hurt your rank when I publish a script? I hope so! I am spreading knowledge to your competition on how to fold better. If what is in my script was one of your 'secret techniques', then your competition just became able to use that technique. However, if that technique wasn't in your set, then both you and the competition will get better scores. Can you apply the script and the technique behind it better than she did?
Scripts raise scores. I am happy about that. When the top 5 people are nailing the native structure every time, I think you can complain about a level playing field, and this game will be finished having accomplished its goal. Until then, there are many things to learn about folding, and I hope to take each one of them and put them into a script.
How unfortunate I haven't been here for so long.
This post is mostly answers to dimension9's first one:
Winning is fun, but it is more fun to share and especially to see someone grow with your teching who becomes even better than you.
But for the question of sharing:
What would happen if all is shared? There would be tons of scripts and tips. Nobody would be able to assess them all or to use them exactly or better then yourself (when you would guard them). So keeping them is now very effective in this sence ;)
But of course, an evolution would start and go on to advance the game. Why am I so sure about this?
I always said that foldit is like the game of Go, so I will explain it with Go ;)
1) In Go it is normal to speak about a game after you have played it with the other player (=the enemy). This is a crucial part of becoming better in the game. Nobody can teach you more than your enemy. And of course, the saying goes: the teacher learns as much as the pupil.
People are even replaying games from people that are dead for a century or longer.
2) In the history, there were different schools of Go, finding new ways of play (=scripts) for certain situation. They kept them for themselves - at least until played in a game against another school. That gave them an advantage for a cetain time. But that doesn't mean that they were the best.
The most famous game in the history of Go is (at least from the anime "Hikaru no Go" on) the game with the so called "ear redding move" http://senseis.xmp.net/?EarReddeningMove between 17year old Shusaku and old Grandmaster Gennan in 1846. (read it now!)
The "taisha joseki" mentioned was very new at that time. It was Gennans special script you could say. Shusaku played it wrong, but in the end the youngster won. That because of a move that can't be expressed in a script. That was pure human genius.
Today the Pro's games have evolved beyond that of this time and it is still improving. And Go is one of the most friendliest Games in the world - because of the sharing.
And also, winning is not the main point in Go. It's the fun you have to play against a players that is as strong as you or better (and Go has an easy way to handicap, so even players with quite different strenght can play together).
Concerning the ranks: Go has a very clear ranking system - but that is mostly a tool for a) comparing the strength of two players to find appropriate players and b) to make you happy if you go up the list. For most players it has not much to do with "I am better, ** you!".
And by the way: Every good human wins every time against a Computer in Go. Whatever the reason…
[quote]If so, then the apparent prevalence of largely computer crunched proteins calls any such claim into question.[/quote]
If you could get one million people to play foldit 24/7 then it would be so.
[quote]What I long for is a Manual Folding Master Class, where the Master Manual Folders may pass on the benefits of their knowledge to the "new guard," in apprenticeship fashion. Now that the game has advanced and progressed so far down the scripting path, these manual skills may not be transmissible/preservable by any other means.[/quote]
100% A teaching ladder would be a great thing. And very important, because I too fear that newbies aren't playing because the have nothing to learn from.
[quote]The tricky part, though, is that tips from manual playing seem to be more difficult to teach– with a script, all one has to do is to share it and have someone else re-download it. [/quote]
100% here, too.
One last point: Cognitive Science has shown: giving is more rewarding then keeping for yourself ;)
:)