Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

cjc343

macrumors 6502
Original poster
If anyone starts a thread at their site, post a link... I'll join in.


Our #1 user is now producing more than the rest of us were as a team. Pretty scary, and pretty good.

Thank you to everyone who has continued to contribute to Macrumors, we are looking at the top 10 right now, and our average hasn't quite levelled out yet.
 
cjc343 said:
If anyone starts a thread at their site, post a link... I'll join in.


Our #1 user is now producing more than the rest of us were as a team. Pretty scary, and pretty good.

Thank you to everyone who has continued to contribute to Macrumors, we are looking at the top 10 right now, and our average hasn't quite levelled out yet.


Huh?? This would be great news, but that would mean we have nearly doubled out output in a matter of a few weeks....and barring any MAJOR changes in anyone's folding output, we would be several years away from making it into the top 10...
 
When the hammer falls, which side of the abyss will you be on? The side of right or the side of might?
 
ok, mustang mac: Explain YOUR theory behind Jethroted's point increase without any processors being seen as added in the Stanford site. Keep in mind that each machine needs to have a unique machine ID or things will screw up.


edit: I also want to see proof that Jethroted is not following the EULA
 
britboy said:
The thread where they were talking about potential threats has unfortunately been closed.

http://teammacosx.homeunix.com/forum/cgi-bin/ikonboard.pl?;act=ST;f=1;t=578;st=25

Seems like they don't want to hear anything other than their own twisted version of events. I wouldn't recommend going there to post. They appear somewhat annoyed about jethroted's sudden increase in power. :(

yeah, I noticed that. I posted second to last before they decided to lock the thread.... I wonder if I would get kicked for starting a topic on their boards...... probably.
 
cjc343 said:
yeah, I noticed that. I posted second to last before they decided to lock the thread.... I wonder if I would get kicked for starting a topic on their boards...... probably.

Sounds very much like soured grapes. "HONOR" indeed!

If it wasn't kosher, the Stamford server would reject the WUs -- like they won't have learned from the experiences of the SETI@home project. Please.
 
Not to mention that the admins on the Folding-Community forums have seen the thread on their forums about Jethroted. Their only concern was the references to keygens, warez, P2P, and the like.

The admins there (from my knowledge) are either in direct contact with the people who are at the head of the F@H project, or they are the people at the head of the F@H project. (I said from my knowedge, this means that I do NOT know this for certain, and you should not quote me as having said it.)
 
Be prepared folks, the hammer is going to fall on this issue, soon. HONOR indeed.
 
maybe i am just ignorant.. but how could Jethroted's output be illegitimate??
didn't he mention on another thread that multiple machines were hooked up to seperate networks or something, thus fewer Machine #'s than actual machines?

could someone explain this claim of invalid folding ?
 
adamjay said:
maybe i am just ignorant.. but how could Jethroted's output be illegitimate??
didn't he mention on another thread that multiple machines were hooked up to seperate networks or something, thus fewer Machine #'s than actual machines?

could someone explain this claim of invalid folding ?

I know nothing about this other than what I have read on this thread and jethroted's and the Team OSX & folding forums, (and moderators please feel free to delete this post if it is inappropriate) but I believe the implication being made is that Jethroted's folding@home app is somehow being installed on machines without user knowledge or permission, i.e like a virus?

I fold for MacRumor's (slowly;-), and this would be really sad if it were true, but it's just as sad if its just a damned lie designed to discredit him and us.

I guess he will keep us posted :confused:
 
I have my own theories and have made them known to the appropriate people, so I can't comment. This has become quite a quagmire and I really wish that we could turn the clock back about 2 weeks. We have had our rivalry, but it was only intended in the spirit of fun and to keep things interesting. A little 'nudge' to be your best. Well, unfortunately, this has turned ugly now. I just hope that the project emerges unscathed.
 
okay, now that i have spent the time reading both forums... i'll give you guys my conclusions.

First, these things i beleive to be true. Jethroted has installed folding on hundreds of networked machines, and he has done so with the permission of the owners of those machines. He made a .msi file to make the installation easier, as anyone setting up a folding farm wouldn't want to have to individually type team and user #'s on each machine. This .msi file was mistaken for another .msi file and has implanted itself in some other shared file that has been circulated quite quickly around.

Things i can't explain completely but do not alarm me: The low number of active processors listed within his user stats. If the machines are networked behind thick proxy's, this is understandable but i cannot explain it 100%. also, the gentleman "Chad" on the other folding forum pasted his Console text that showed the user name as "jethroted@yahoo.com", a name that doesn't exist in stanford's stats database. if it did that would mean that a user completed at least 1 or 2 WU's under this name, and jethroted would not get those points but rather, a new user jethroted@yahoo.com would, right? i also do not understand why the .msi has installed folding to be a Maximum processor usage priority program. If jehtroted truley wanted to maliciously install F@H on random computers, in a Spyware format (like i beleive he is being accused of, eh??) he'd probably leave it as a low priority app that people wouldn't notice until at least a few WU's were completed.

just my thoughts, i beleive that there is only circumstancial evidence pointing to wrongdoing here, but once you unfold all the pieces its hardly even circumstancial at that point.

i can only hope that this doesn't taint the image of F@H in the extended cyber-community. My mom won't run F@H because she just got a new Athlon 64 and thinks its a spyware... if she gets wind of this situation, then F@H for her will surely never happen.

Also, we can only assume that jethroted means well. Though not all users here are American, the thought is that a man is innocent until proven guilty. He certainly doesn't look guilty to me, emailing and conversing with the users who have been wrongfully 'infected' with F@H, and trying to remedy the situation.
 
adamjay said:
...the gentleman "Chad" on the other folding forum pasted his Console text that showed the user name as "jethroted@yahoo.com", a name that doesn't exist in stanford's stats database. if it did that would mean that a user completed at least 1 or 2 WU's under this name, and jethroted would not get those points but rather, a new user jethroted@yahoo.com would, right?

I brought this up in one of the threads and was told that Stanford uses the "@yahoo" part to keep users seperate by domain. It doesn't work perfectly, but if there are 2 users with the same user name coming from different domains, then they can sort it out.
 
NoahJ said:
Be prepared folks, the hammer is going to fall on this issue, soon. HONOR indeed.
Mustang Mac said:
I have my own theories and have made them known to the appropriate people, so I can't comment. This has become quite a quagmire and I really wish that we could turn the clock back about 2 weeks. We have had our rivalry, but it was only intended in the spirit of fun and to keep things interesting. A little 'nudge' to be your best. Well, unfortunately, this has turned ugly now. I just hope that the project emerges unscathed.

Quite the flair for the melodramatic you've got over there at Team Mac OS X.

Let's give the chicken little act a rest until more information has come out about this. As others have posted, there is little to indicate intentional wrongdoing on jethroted's part - he has contacted Vijay and they will sort things out.
 
Excellent. Communication is the key. Not being melodramatic, just vigilant and expressive. Thanks.
 
cjc343 said:
I brought this up in one of the threads and was told that Stanford uses the "@yahoo" part to keep users seperate by domain. It doesn't work perfectly, but if there are 2 users with the same user name coming from different domains, then they can sort it out.

this makes sense, as when you search for jethroted@yahoo.com , 2 names pop up

Jethroted and jethroted , but each have 6 processors in the last 7 days, 16 in the last 50.

sorry guys, i'm wanting to make knee jerk reactions like others are, but with so little information, i just can't judge the situation right now.
 
adamjay said:
this makes sense, as when you search for jethroted@yahoo.com , 2 names pop up

Jethroted and jethroted , but each have 6 processors in the last 7 days, 16 in the last 50.

sorry guys, i'm wanting to make knee jerk reactions like others are, but with so little information, i just can't judge the situation right now.


He is listed twice because he has folded for 2 teams. Anonymous and Macrumors.
 
Mustang Mac said:
Excellent. Communication is the key. Not being melodramatic, just vigilant and expressive. Thanks.

That's wonderful Mustang. But, just a small point, you might want to think a little about your sig. As far as I was aware, folding is all about benefiting others, but your sig makes it sound like it's all about you. Is that the image Team Mac OSX want to project? :cool:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.