Babeees <333
New member
My PS3 died yesterday folding -.-, mey she rest in peace.
Ultimate Guide To Folding@home
- Thread starter Darrickw
- Start date
Bronco 212
New member
wonderful prog, I on it now with k-lite team. I think it is great and will try to 24/7 it as my grand pa has cancer 
Mohua Rumpa
New member
Congratulations, VB1234 you really are shooting up fast!Originally posted by Virtualbody1234@15 April 2004 - 04:28
200 WU completed now.
Any chance that this could be pinned back in the lounge? It's so quiet in here...
Pat Nguyen
New member
Some more useful links:
See our team ranking @ #1291
Our Team Stats on ExtremeOverClocking
And here you can get Electron Microscope, a program to monitor your progress.
See our team ranking @ #1291
Our Team Stats on ExtremeOverClocking
And here you can get Electron Microscope, a program to monitor your progress.
~Linda~ ^-^
New member
:blink:Originally posted by FlyingDutchman@24 January 2004 - 14:34
I assume you've all checked the Team statistics, and noticed that Lamsey isn't leading by THAT much
We still can catch him...
I'm 15th. I only joined a week ago, RAB :huh:
I've come to the conclusion that the new team stats are screwed. We've just been passed by "p2p_community". But before the new stats there were no threats. And if you look at their individual points they are quite impressive on a daily basis, yet they have zero points for the week.
Since they have the same position in the Stanford lists (which is the source of these stats) I suspect hacking. The top of their group ("Le_PoUnT") supposedly has had 159 active processors in the last week, yet both his daily and weekly points are zero. And he has supposedly performed 842 WU's on one project, but only 1 on each of another 4 projects. Similar trends can be seen for their number 3 "xlybox".
This is obviously nonsense, yet equally obviously the results have been returned to Stanford otherwise they would not have been credited with the points. The only conclusion is that the same results have been returned time and time again.
If my conclusions are correct, then statistically this dangerously skews the possibilities, not only making those results worthless, but undermining a lot of work done by other people.
I hope I'm wrong.
Since they have the same position in the Stanford lists (which is the source of these stats) I suspect hacking. The top of their group ("Le_PoUnT") supposedly has had 159 active processors in the last week, yet both his daily and weekly points are zero. And he has supposedly performed 842 WU's on one project, but only 1 on each of another 4 projects. Similar trends can be seen for their number 3 "xlybox".
This is obviously nonsense, yet equally obviously the results have been returned to Stanford otherwise they would not have been credited with the points. The only conclusion is that the same results have been returned time and time again.
If my conclusions are correct, then statistically this dangerously skews the possibilities, not only making those results worthless, but undermining a lot of work done by other people.
I hope I'm wrong.
John Choats
New member
Congrats on getting 10,100 Lamsey.
