Jump to content
C.M

Collatz Conjecture

Recommended Posts

dblanch256
On 12/17/2018 at 11:52 AM, Aurum said:

I can see no useful reason to disprove the Collatz Conjecture. This project has no benefit to anybody. I don't think this kind of project should be Whitelisted for GRC. Let's take a vote.

 

Without prejudice, please note that we've "been down this road before".  Just so you know.  About a year ago there was a lengthy (but good) debate about "what role should project WORTHINESS play in determining Gridcoin white-listing status."

 

The "short" answer is that it became quickly apparent that MOST of us could not agree on whether or not a PARTICULAR project had "scientific value".  I suspect that's because our backgrounds are very different.  For example, what might excite a mathematician doesn't necessary "do anything" for a biologist.

 

While it would be nifty to have a "universal criteria" we could all use to measure the "scientific validity" of each project, there is no obvious easy way to do it ourselves.  Of course, you are free to advocate "for" or "against" any project you like.  I'm simply saying that we (the Gridcoin community) ultimately decided it wasn't a realistic or "strictly necessary" goal so that's how we got to where we are today.

 

Currently white-listing is based on a number of practical features like "does the project have a steady supply of work units" which are unrelated to the perceived "intrinsic scientific value" of the project.  That is left entirely up to the user to decide (i.e. you).  [FWIW, I personally agree that trying to prove the Collatz Conjecture FALSE is unlikely to happen, because I suspect it is TRUE--and that CANNOT be proven by the failure of computational search to find an exception.  It might only be proven TRUE the same way Fermat's Theorem was proven true, by an outstanding human using "real math".  So just between us--I'm with you.]  But that's beside the larger point here.

 

I hope you find this to be useful background information.  I don't mean to censor your concern at all.  I'm just trying to make you aware of the history of this argument, so you'll understand if you get a reaction of "been there--done that" from others.

 

Best wishes and hope you find satisfaction here!

  • Like 3
  • Winner 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aurum
On 12/22/2018 at 8:06 AM, suncrunch said:

I suppose you'd also be in favor of dropping most of the other math-related projects as well?

I'm not opposed to math projects per se, I just like to know the possibility of an applied real world application may result. Finding the trillionth decimal place of pi seems pretty worthless. But I just learned from reading the GRC tweeter thread that [email protected] includes the shortest Optimal Golomb Ruler that has applications in X-ray crystallography and placement of phased-array antenna so I joined in.

Nobody has offered a possible application for why the grid should pay GRC for disproving the Collatz Conjecture (DBLANCH256 explains much better than I can on the next page).

GC17.jpg

Edited by Aurum (see edit history)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aurum
On 12/22/2018 at 9:05 AM, Orpy said:

How's the voting going on your previous whining?

Looks like Gunde cast the deciding vote. Unless one of the handful of those that hold over 30% of GRC cast their votes.

As for the whining, it'll never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gunde [closed]
21 hours ago, dblanch256 said:

 

Without prejudice, please note that we've "been down this road before".  Just so you know.  About a year ago there was a lengthy (but good) debate about "what role should project WORTHINESS play in determining Gridcoin white-listing status."

 

The "short" answer is that it became quickly apparent that MOST of us could not agree on whether or not a PARTICULAR project had "scientific value".  I suspect that's because our backgrounds are very different.  For example, what might excite a mathematician doesn't necessary "do anything" for a biologist.

 

While it would be nifty to have a "universal criteria" we could all use to measure the "scientific validity" of each project, there is no obvious easy way to do it ourselves.  Of course, you are free to advocate "for" or "against" any project you like.  I'm simply saying that we (the Gridcoin community) ultimately decided it wasn't a realistic or "strictly necessary" goal so that's how we got to where we are today.

 

Currently white-listing is based on a number of practical features like "does the project have a steady supply of work units" which are unrelated to the perceived "intrinsic scientific value" of the project.  That is left entirely up to the user to decide (i.e. you).  [FWIW, I personally agree that trying to prove the Collatz Conjecture FALSE is unlikely to happen, because I suspect it is TRUE--and that CANNOT be proven by the failure of computational search to find an exception.  It might only be proven TRUE the same way Fermat's Theorem was proven true, by an outstanding human using "real math".  So just between us--I'm with you.]  But that's beside the larger point here.

 

I hope you find this to be useful background information.  I don't mean to censor your concern at all.  I'm just trying to make you aware of the history of this argument, so you'll understand if you get a reaction of "been there--done that" from others.

 

Best wishes and hope you find satisfaction here!

We had a great discussion on this as you say when poll hit us to  Moo! Wrapper. The project itself had a goal to prove that already been approved. I am open for voting on existing whitelisted projects could be a yearly poll (this have been discussed in slack) to each one that are listed. Most of the project have been listed since start and never got any vote on. To go with goal "no scientific use" is something that is hard to get an answer of and for BOINC as to computation for science,  what we found or solve to project could be used in many ways later on. There are more to it as some project do endless raw data or a sort of simulation to store data in later in possible use cases. It could be open data for public on webpage as FIND had the goal for. There are project that have a lab/intruments and build an application and create a batches of work based on a specific parameters to get an result that could be analyzed and used to create a paper to. The hard part is that project handle things diffrently and for me it important to show support the project that have a need in computetation that we provide. BOINC have been open and volenteer users have been there done so for a long time, it should be open for the user that belive on project and goal they have.


I think we should keep/add project that could provide any use/ progress or that would provide work to store data and could be used to publish it on paper. Many of these project are created from Phd student and run by people from University world wide with low economy to rent servers to do the job done.

Projects could/would probably change at some point and getting a procedurer that it is time for a poll on project, maybe if after a year or so to get a revote on it to get members involved to have re-view on it. If project could not provide work enough it would fall in to greylist we have today and i would like to get more project back that gone out because they didn´t provide work enough to be able to make a steady flow of work, these have been MindeModeling, Denis and BURP.

My view is to show support to project as long as they have a possible target to find a solution on something.

  • Winner 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gunde [closed]
4 hours ago, Aurum said:

Looks like Gunde cast the deciding vote. Unless one of the handful of those that hold over 30% of GRC cast their votes.

As for the whining, it'll never end.

 

I am not against members thoughts, it would have a value on what we vote for. We should have a vote on it if it is needed or if we found any bad project that harm or is a pure waste of comutation. We have voting system that do work and been used to this and great example have been Moo Wrapper for this. Users leave there thought and got strong enough to make it out of whitelist.
The share/weight of members is something to work on it may not be perfect and never be so in view of members. We had done changes in passed to change weight and magnitude got lower weight as to what it was before. An disussion in hangout/stemmit and chat have been to go 1=1 vote, but this would open to exploit and not value members correctly.
I open on discusstion on project as to these threads at CCT/slack/discord/steemit/hangout/reddit and would be happy to get a info what user think about project or the got info on changes to project to BOINC. I mostly read at forums at project website and if think it is important to share i would do it here at CCT or any chat. If there is a need to vote it would be good to share the work on as a poll-draft ad we have at slack. Members would help to shape a proper poll and provide a well written dokument on subject to poll.

Let members help you it would be better for community and Gridcoin to go alone and avoid poll that only have one answer or can´t provide info or history to the poll.
For me and hopefully others it would be great to create guidlines and protocol to create something that we follow.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dblanch256

@Gunde We should have a vote on it if it is needed or if we found any bad project that harm or is a pure waste of computation ...

 

You have made some excellent points.

 

Just allow me, if you will, to inject:

 

"When I find myself in times of trouble, Mother Mary comes to me, Speaking words of wisdom, " 

a) Leave it be.

b) Let it alone.

c) Let it be.

 

-- John Lennon

 

Or perhaps more to the point:  "One man's ceiling is another man's floor."  -- Paul Simon

 

Sometimes the best question to ask first is "Should we even be deciding this?" because if the consensus is "No" then the issue has been resolved without any further debate.

 

So let me ask it here.  Why is it important (to Gridcoin) that "scientifically worthless" projects" be de-listed?  [Confession:  I could name a few myself that I'm pretty certain are pointless, but that's not relevant to the case I'm building here.]

 

Everybody in the Gridcoin community is allowed to choose which projects they work on.  It would be difficult to call it "volunteer computing" if that were not the case.  Therefore, if you believe that "Project X" is a pure waste of time, you don't have to work on it.  Problem solved.  But if you believe that "nobody should be allowed work on it" then you have a much more difficult case to make, starting with question "what qualifies you as the expert in such things, but worse, why do the rest of us need  you to dictate how we choose to volunteer their time?"

 

It's a minor-sounding difference semantically, but to me it's the very heart of the issue.

 

EXAMPLE

 

Imagine that I volunteer at a food bank, and spent my time helping to feed the hungry.  If you come along and say "I'd never spend my time like that" we'd be fine.

 

But if you said "And you shouldn't be doing it either" now you've crossed a line and the "burden of proof" belongs entirely to you.  I would hope that before you took control of my decision, that you were operating directly on instructions from God, because if not, I'd strongly urge you to mind your own business and allow me to do the same.

 

That's why I'm proposing that we (Gridcoin members) avoid being the "project police".  Currently, when projects are black- or gray-listed it's due to practical problems with them (e.g. uneven work availability, inability of Gridcoin to scrape project stats (e.g. PrimeGrid), or a bunch of other "work-ability problems" --NOT including a project's intrinsic "value" or "worthiness".

 

That's how I think we got to where we are now.  To borrow an old TV cliche, "If you don't like the show, change the channel." is easier and more defensible than calling the network and demanding that they "take that stupid show off the air".

 

Your thoughts and comments are always welcome.

 

-- Dave [My view are not always my own.]  😉

 

Edited by dblanch256 (see edit history)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gunde [closed]
1 hour ago, dblanch256 said:

@Gunde We should have a vote on it if it is needed or if we found any bad project that harm or is a pure waste of computation ...

 

You have made some excellent points.

 

Just allow me, if you will, to inject

"When I find myself in times of trouble, Mother Mary comes to me, Seeking words of wisdom, "  -- John Lennon

a) Leave it be.

b) Let it alone.

c) Let it be.

 

Or perhaps more to the point:  "One man's ceiling is another man's floor."  -- Paul Simon

 

Sometimes the best question to ask first is "Should we even be deciding this?" because if the consensus is "No" then the issue has been resolved without further debate.

 

So let me ask it here.  Why is it important (to Gridcoin) that only "worthwhile projects" be white-listed?

 

Everybody in the Gridcoin community is allowed to choose which projects they work on.  Therefore, if you believe that "Project X" is a pure waste of time, you don't have to work on it.  Problem solved.  If you believe that "nobody should be allowed work on it" then you have a much more difficult case to argue, starting with "what qualifies YOU as the expert, and why (seriously!) should you be attempting to dictate how other folks choose to volunteer their time?"

 

It's a minor-sounding difference, but to me it lies at the crux of the debate.

 

EXAMPLE

 

Imagine that I volunteer at a food bank, and spent my time helping to feed the hungry.  If you come along and say "I'd never spend my time like that" we'd be fine.

 

But if you said "And you shouldn't be doing it either" now you've crossed an ethical line and the "burden of proof" belongs entirely to you.  I would hope that before you took control of my decisions, that you were operating directly on instructions from God, because if not, I'd strongly urge you to mind your own business and allow me to do the same.

 

So.  That's why I'm taking the position that we (Gridcoin members) don't want to police project participation.  Currently, when projects are black- or gray-listed it's due to practical problems with them (e.g. uneven work availability, inability to scrape project stats needed to sustain Gridcoin (e.g. PrimeGrid), or a bunch of other "work-ability problems" problems--but NOT project "value" or "worthiness".

 

That's how I think we got to where we are now.  To borrow an old TV cliche, "If you don't like the show, change the channel." is easier and more defensible than calling the network and demanding that they "take that stupid show off the air".

 

You're thoughts are always welcome by me.

 

-- Dave

 

Thanks great view and disussion on this.

 

In my time to Gridcoin i got another view then more regular volenteer as i was before to boinc. For Gridcoin i choosed to not involve my personal view on project the same way i would have before to project. I have separated the worthly and use of to project , and since i the day i made polls to vote out great project it hurt me a lot leave them behind in support from Gridcoin. I see it as impossible to work out for Gridcoin and lack of greylist at that time to arrange a working reward to it. Since this time it had an effect on view also to value project and need of computation to project that fight to stay in shape.
  
We should yes if if it is pure waste, the whole boinc community as volunteers should be a part and get an interest of it if so.  I do get an view and thought on if raw data collecting or simulation could counted to users to be a waste or not. I am not sure my self on to this and end up with many "if" to this.

"if" itcould in near future be used in any case
"if"they could store as open data to other Phd students.
"if" result could have any use in other cases.
"if"...

After my time of these years of work i do leave it to project admin and admire their passion and work to project more then before and leave my support to as have strong will to them to keep it alive. My second thought is that it would not be driven up for many years if them self did not have strong feeling for project and use of it. There have been project with less interest from project admins and not few of these have admin not answer or update or made any changes to project. These sent a bad signs to me and avoid them and used my vote in passed to not support contribution to.
It is on most selfish way but in these cases members got some feeling and they also used it against it.


"Or perhaps more to the point:  "One man's ceiling is another man's floor."  -- Paul Simon" We are leave under same roof if turn it in way to Gridcoin and if look wide we also do live on same planet and would be same interest and needs. We think diffrently in many subjects and need but in a whole i do think we do agree what is good or bad andpriority would follow us and take us at end.

What we expirence in our life effect a lot and we could learn a lot from them. Taking wisdom from the elder have high weight for me in life and should be use also to this.

I also like to leave it open user/member to choose if would like to work to project or not. It not in my interest or judge anyone which project they should support. If see a community that would strong feeling to project ofcours i would support the members to keep it. I should not use and never will use my weight to use any weight or power to go against them. To keep door open is important to me even if would have thought against it. It would be on me to avoid a project if would not fit me not to turn others against it.

As you point out i should leave my opinon out of it in example it simply not my buisness, i would in most cases that they would have more info or judement then me and leave to them if so. I could never speak for members and avoid "we" to it but to Gridcoin i do show my thought in chat or post like here or in vote to Gridcoin on how i see it and be a part to shape it but try to avoid to lead them to how they vote. This always hard when "I" get a view on things and also to others. What ido have have an effect on Gridcoin and also project, every word count and can be turned against another and even missleading others.

I am not perfect and dubt that anyone here is so and. For a community as Gridcoin it would give strenght as more members take part and avoid false judgement and personal opinon may be also reduced.
For Gridcoin I would  like to vote on system then specific project/subject, and to make this happen we do have a huge need on discussion to form things like that. it would be something to share to new users and also remind others.

 

Edited by Gunde (see edit history)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dblanch256

@Gunde It sounds like we're not that far apart in our conclusions.

 

I'd propose that Gridcoin white-list everything that isn't problematic (has enough work, behaves well, etc.)  That maximizes user choice.

 

At the same time, any of us are allowed to "make our case" in the specific project forum for WHY we believe a particular project is a waste of time.

 

Then the people who might not have known can read our analysis and decide whether THEY want to waste THEIR time or not.

 

I think it's better to risk that SOME people will continue to work on unproductive projects than to "vote the projects off the white-list".

[Whenever you maximize choices for a population, SOME people will do dumb things.  That's just the cost of liberty and individual freedom.]

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dblanch256
On 12/24/2018 at 11:32 AM, Aurum said:

I'm not opposed to math projects per se, I just like to know the possibility of an applied real world application may result. Finding the trillionth decimal place of pi seems pretty worthless. But I just learned from reading the GRC tweeter thread that [email protected] includes the shortest Optimal Golomb Ruler that has applications in X-ray crystallography and placement of phased-array antenna so I joined in.

Nobody has offered a possible application for why the grid should pay GRC for disproving the Collatz Conjecture (DBLANCH256 explains much better than I can on the next page).

GC17.jpg

 

OVERVIEW

 

Your fundamental question was actually a very good one.  Gridcoin was invented to be an alternative to "pointless work" like Bitcoin hashing.

So it follows that we should ask the question, "how is doing pointless science better than doing pointless hashing".  [I think that was your theme.]  By now you know how I feel about some of that, but it was a totally valid question to ask.

 

Fun example:  I was asking one of my PhD math friends about why we fixate on computational approaches to certain math proofs when, in many cases they are so unlikely to succeed.  Also, some project could be better "solved" by analysis--it just that the people who programmed them probably didn't consult with good analyst first (it happens).  Part of this riddle is answered by this quote:

 

"When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail!"

 

He showed me two or three examples of tricky conjectures which "appeared true" based on trying millions of natural numbers (1, 2 ... N).  But one day somebody found a single exception, enough to prove it false.  That number had eighteen digits!  So in most cases it's impossible to prove that (a) a project won't succeed eventually, and (b) even if it does succeed, it will never have any practical value.  I hope we a agree on that much, so far.  To some people, most of math has no practical application in their lives except for arithmetic!  So the word "practical" itself means very different things to different people.

 

There are two other areas that I'd encourage you to consider. 

 

TIMING

 

Trust me, it's hard being the "new kid" in a forum (any forum).  God knows I've said a lot of things at first that I now regret, but I really tried to listen and learn more--and complain less.  If people decide you're sincere (not just a "dick" or a "show-off") they will jump in and help you, even if they have already answered it 50 times before.

 

Sometimes I suspected before I posted that somebody must have raised this issue before.  But I still wanted answers.  So I posted anyway, but tried really hard to post respectfully to avoid insulting the very same people who might have helped me.  I'm sure you've noticed by now that when a post "sounds hostile" it tends to get answered in a scolding or hostile way--that's just human nature.  Which brings us to tone ...

 

TONE

 

It's not always only about what you say.  Very often what's more important is how you say it.  I heard that fifty years ago, but it still took me almost a lifetime to get better at it.  We tend to think we're always logical and don't pay much attention to the emotion of our posts.  But we we can't help reacting emotionally when we receive info from others!  That's not logical, is it?  But unfortunately, the tone of your post matters--a lot--even if it shouldn't.

 

There is also the fact that we are a global enterprise.  What some cultures think is funny or cute might be considered "crude or rude" by others.  If that wasn't enough, we have "kiddies" mixed in with "old farts" like me.  Our sense of "what's funny" changes with age.  Some statements or actions you think are "fun or cute" will strike other people as "silly" or even "stupid".  I'm not saying "don't be yourself".  [Just be aware of this possibility before you hit SUBMIT REPLY.]

 

SUMMARY

 

I don't really know you.  We haven't talked enough for me to have a solid opinion.  But for right now, I choose to assume that you are a reasonable guy whose first few posts got "smacked down" probably because of timing or tone.  Nobody's perfect.  I'm going to wait to see how you progress here before I judge you, because most people here have good intentions (even if they are a little awkward at first).  I think you have good intentions--unless you prove me wrong.

 

Meanwhile, if you'll "walk with me" on this interesting journey, I'll happily walk with you.

 

-- Dave

 

 

Edited by dblanch256 (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dblanch256

@Gunde wrote:  what we found or solve to project could be used in many ways later on. There are more to it as some project do endless raw data or a sort of simulation to store data in later in possible use cases. It could be open data for public on webpage as FIND had the goal for. There are project that have a lab/intruments and build an application and create a batches of work based on a specific parameters to get an result that could be analyzed and used to create a paper to.

 

Your insight is wise.  It reminded me of a few historical examples:

 

(1)  For years (sometimes centuries) a very few people in England, and maybe elsewhere, recorded local weather (temperature and humidity).  Although it helped them a little bit, most people thought they were crazy for taking so much time and trouble to do this.  It wasn't worthwhile, at the time.  Now 100 years later we wish we had more of this same historical data, and from more locations, to use in our modern climate and weather models!

 

(2) The early Danish astronomer Tycho Brae (1546 – 1601) took endless measurements of the planets and stars using some the very first telescopes.  Soon he had a huge number of hand-written volumes of the stuff.  To outsiders he was a bit of a freak.  Nobody at the time saw any practical value in most of his work.  Yet later, from 1600 until his death in 1601, he was assisted by Johannes Kepler, who later used Tycho's astronomical data to develop his three laws of planetary motion.  Kepler was followed by Newton who used a large portion of Brae's work as experimental proof that his simple theory of gravity was correct--not just a nice looking equation.

 

I think these examples show why we must be careful before we declare that "this project is obviously a waste of time".  Like I said before, for the purposes of Gridcoin, we should first ask "is it even necessary for all of to agree on this on a project-by-project basis?  I still think the answer to this is "no".

 

@Gunde, thank you for making me think about that!

 

-- Dave

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aurum
On 12/24/2018 at 1:03 PM, Gunde said:

Let members help you it would be better for community and Gridcoin to go alone and avoid poll that only have one answer or can´t provide info or history to the poll.
For me and hopefully others it would be great to create guidlines and protocol to create something that we follow.

As I said before those polls were mistakes. There were no instructions on how to create a poll and no way to delete or correct a mistake. I asked that those two defective polls be deleted. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dblanch256
3 hours ago, Aurum said:

As I said before those polls were mistakes. There were no instructions on how to create a poll and no way to delete or correct a mistake. I asked that those two defective polls be deleted. 

 

Fine to mention such problems.  That's the best way to have them fixed.  The key is admitting your own mistakes (if you can) before other people get a chance to point them out to you!  That isn't always possible, but we can TRY.

 

I found what looked like a different poll problem a month ago.  My wallet shows no indication of whether or not I voted on any issue--and I can't always remember.  Worse, I discovered that I was able to vote multiple times on the same issue (at least I was charged for it) and I didn't know what that meant.  Since I was a software developer for the FAA for many years, I considered both of these features to be minor "design flaws".

 

So I posted (trying not to be TOO whiny about it).  More like a simple question--what's happening? and would you consider adding a check mark or something that would alert me that I'd already voted (or not) for each issue.

 

I got a quick response from the experts.  They said that when you vote multiple times, only the last one counts.  They did this to allow people to change their vote.  I'm OK with that.  Regarding how I can tell whether or not I voted at all is an feature they agreed would be nice to have.  So I'm happy with those answers.

 

Always I remind myself that for every expert and developer on this team, there are probably 500-1000 of us wanting changes--and until very recently the developers weren't even being paid for their work.  That's why "tone" of our posts matters so much.  There is a "wrong way" to ask for changes and a "right way".  I see examples of both ways almost every day here.

 

Example of Wrong Way:  "Wallet has a problem.  You guys need to fix it immediately or else I'll leave."

Example of Wrong Way:  "When are you idiots going to fix/add a feature that I want?"

 

Examples of   Right Way:  "I have a suggestion for a change/feature.  Would you consider doing <x>?"

Example of     Right Way:  "I'm having this problem.  What am I perhaps misunderstanding or doing wrong?"

 

Happy to hear your poll was a mistake.  From your earlier posts, I was thought you were trying to "embarrass" the developers and inconvenience the rest of us just to make a selfish point.  I'm not saying you didn't have a valid point, but I was worried about the way you said it.  Glad to hear that it wasn't exactly what you meant.

 

Were you here last August 2018?  That was about when Gridcoin was about to mint its 1,000, 000th block.  This would have been a nice milestone to celebrate.  But there was a developer who wasn't happy because of a security bug that hadn't been fixed yet.  Instead of "being patient and respectful" he decided to make his point by using the bug to grab the next six blocks for himself (including the "magic" 1,000,000th block).  Some people didn't care that much.  Others this action as a childish and selfish action he did to draw attention himself and to his idea of what the development priorities SHOULD have been.  [I didn't really care one way or the other, but I did understand why some people were so annoyed with him.]

 

I think you have a better perspective now.  I'd like to see your rating go up after this because then everybody will take what you say more seriously.

 

One last thing.  If you ever want to BUY Gridcoin I do that for my friends.  I don't charge any fee for this--I just like to save people the trouble of having to 1) Buy BTC with cash, then 2) Use an Exchange to convert to GRC, then 3) transfer new GRC to Gridcoin wallet.  Most of my "customers" are people who want to solo mine (not in the pool) so in order to get paid regularly they need a large number of GRC (10,000 or more).  All the data I've collected (and graphed) shows that there is little or no difference between how much you earn comparing solo mining to pool mining, but some people just want to solo mine anyway.  If you solo mine with only 1,000 GRC it can take months before you stake a block.  But if you have 100,000 GRC you probably get paid at least once per day.

 

Either way, happy crunching!

 

-- Dave

Edited by dblanch256 (see edit history)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dblanch256

@Gunde wrote:  what we found or solve to project could be used in many ways later on. There are more to it as some project do endless raw data or a sort of simulation to store data in later in possible use cases. It could be open data for public on webpage as FIND had the goal for. There are project that have a lab/intruments and build an application and create a batches of work based on a specific parameters to get an result that could be analyzed and used to create a paper to.

 

Your insight is wise.  It reminded me of a few historical examples:

 

(1)  For years (sometimes centuries) a very few people in England, and maybe elsewhere, recorded local weather (temperature and humidity).  Although it helped them a little bit, most people thought they were crazy for taking so much time and trouble to do this.  It wasn't worthwhile, at the time.  Now 100 years later we wish we had more of this same historical data, and from more locations, to use in our modern climate and weather models!

 

(2) The early Danish astronomer Tycho Brae (1546 – 1601) took endless measurements of the planets and stars using some the very first telescopes.  Soon he had a huge number of hand-written volumes of the stuff.  To outsiders he was a bit of a freak.  Nobody at the time saw any practical value in most of his work.  Yet later, from 1600 until his death in 1601, he was assisted by Johannes Kepler, who later used Tycho's astronomical data to develop his three laws of planetary motion.  Kepler was followed by Newton who used a large portion of Brae's work as experimental proof that his simple theory of gravity was correct--not just a nice looking equation.

 

I think these examples show why we must be careful before we declare that "this project is obviously a waste of time".  Like I said before, for the purposes of Gridcoin, we should first ask "is it even necessary for all of to agree on this on a project-by-project basis?  I still think the answer to this is "no".

 

@Gunde, thank you for making me think about that!

 

-- Dave

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aurum
20 hours ago, dblanch256 said:

They said that when you vote multiple times, only the last one counts.  They did this to allow people to change their vote. 

 

Nice to know. I also asked how to change my vote. I just tried this. I stumbled on a way to see all the votes in a poll but today I can't remember how.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aurum
On 12/24/2018 at 8:32 AM, Aurum said:

I'm not opposed to math projects per se, I just like to know the possibility of an applied real world application may result. Finding the trillionth decimal place of pi seems pretty worthless. But I just learned from reading the GRC tweeter thread that [email protected] includes the shortest Optimal Golomb Ruler that has applications in X-ray crystallography and placement of phased-array antenna so I joined in.

Nobody has offered a possible application for why the grid should pay GRC for disproving the Collatz Conjecture (DBLANCH256 explains much better than I can on the next page).

GC17.jpg

 

Nobody caught on to why I included their banner ad. "End wasteful hashing today" like the Collatz Conjecture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Cryptocurrenytalk Logo

 

News, information, and discussions about cryptocurrencies, blockchains, technology, and events. Blockchaintalk is your source for advice on what to mine, technical details, new launch announcements, and advice from trusted members of the community. Cryptocurrencytalk is your source for everything crypto. We love discussing the world of cryptocurrencies.

 

   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using CRYPTOCURRENCYTALK.COM, you agree to our Terms of Use.