flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Do you participate in Grid computing projects?

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
OzzY



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1029
Location: Everywhere
OzzY
I just found this: http://www.hyper.net/dc-howto.html
Looks quite interesting... use lots of machines to build more computer power to help solving human diseases.

Is anyone participating in such projects?
Post 25 Sep 2007, 11:51
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Embrance



Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Posts: 116
Location: Greece
Embrance
This is ridiculous.I bet most companies have already the answer for diseases like cancer but wont give up out the secret,because of $.Simple as that.
Post 25 Sep 2007, 21:00
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
How would most companies profit from people having cancer?

How did they shut up all those scientist who (supposedly by you) discovered cure for cancer?
Post 25 Sep 2007, 21:41
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Embrance



Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Posts: 116
Location: Greece
Embrance
How they have profit?By selling medicine.Really,google,or msn this and you will find plenty of info.
Post 26 Sep 2007, 18:44
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
OzzY



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1029
Location: Everywhere
OzzY
It's important to notice that some projects are non-profit.
The rosetta@home project for example is non-profit and the algorithm they use to find out the 3D represetantions of proteins is open source.
At least this project says very clearly they won't use donated CPU power for profit.
The Boinc software used in lots of projects is also open source.

Quote:

I bet most companies have already the answer for diseases like cancer but wont give up out the secret,because of $

Although I quite agree with that.
Post 26 Sep 2007, 19:22
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
Embrance: Can you give me some links? I don't even know what to start googling. "cure for cancer conspiracy"?
Post 26 Sep 2007, 19:36
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
MHajduk



Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6034
Location: Poland
MHajduk
Embrance wrote:
I bet most companies have already the answer for diseases like cancer but wont give up out the secret,because of $.
Sorry, but I think that this is pure nonsense. These companies could earn more on selling real cure than keeping it in secret. I suppose that reason of such situation is education level, which becomes more and more worse in every country around the world.
Post 27 Sep 2007, 07:37
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
ManOfSteel



Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1154
ManOfSteel
Even if there are no or few proof about a conspiracy, there is no doubt a single treatment against cancer or AIDS is far less profitable than the numerous chemo or tri-therapy treatments specially that these cannot be reproduced easily or at all while a single drug could be easily copied as a generic medicine. And we know how hard the pharmaceutical industry has been fighting generics, so I guess there are huge interests at stake (probably trillions of $).

Quote:
How did they shut up all those scientist who (supposedly by you) discovered cure for cancer?

I don't believe they have already discovered a cure, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out the pharmaceutical industry is doing everything in its power to delay it.
Few scientists around the world are independent in their researches, they are told what to do and what not to do, when to do it and how to do it. There are very limited funds (compared to space or military programs) and even when a research is done in governmental labs, significant parts of the funds come from the pharmaceutical industry itself. With the further liberalization of public services I don't see how that trend could reverse.
Post 27 Sep 2007, 13:13
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
Quote:
there is no doubt a single treatment against cancer or AIDS is far less profitable than the numerous

agree. motivation is there, but that isn't a proof. You can't believe someone does something just because he has some reason to do it. He also must be bitch enough to do it, and must be powerful enough to do it.

Quote:
I don't believe they have already discovered a cure, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out the pharmaceutical industry is doing everything in its power to delay it.

but think of it another way: immediately as one of them finds cure and makes it public, they will all go out of bussiness. They would have to secure every single researcher worldwide under their control. I would be surprised if they would be powerful enough for this.
Post 27 Sep 2007, 13:25
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
Education level is a real problem
With TV and entertainment they hold all the brains of theirs victims
Cancer, Aids, Gentic problems and others are the response of nature to us
We are the cancer of the planet, remember that
The real big problem is not $,£,€ it is the repartition of this

1% holds 99% of the money
99% survive with 1% of the money

The world debt, virtual and invented by bankers, is now a real problem
So i'll participate to a grid project that consist in finding a solution to kill the 1% that hold the 99% of the money and i hope that it will exist one day
Post 27 Sep 2007, 13:29
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
edfed: the movement you described (to get rid, not nescessary kill, the 1%) is called "socialism", or "communism" in US.
Post 27 Sep 2007, 14:53
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
for me it is the balancing

and i really prefer to never speak about politic and religion

i know the bigest problem is not the 1% but the lack of education
if you are really strong in your life then you never think about killing 1%

forgive me for my deep asshole mind
Post 27 Sep 2007, 15:41
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DustWolf



Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia
DustWolf
Embrance wrote:
This is ridiculous.I bet most companies have already the answer for diseases like cancer but wont give up out the secret,because of $.Simple as that.


That is redicilous. I work in a field that deals with researchers at pharmaceutical companies on a daily basis. We speak as friends and they explain their problems to us.

Finding the cure for cancer and stuff like that today is like trying to shoot a target while blindfolded, in a room filled with innocent people and not knowing where the target is. They try to make a best estimate, and then take a shot at it. Then the laws in this area try to minimize their chance of actually pulling the trigger so that they don't shoot any of the innocent bystanders by accident (e.g. make a cure that kills the patient, or leaves them braindamaged or something).

In other words, the chances of them actually getting it right are slim on their own. And after they got a likely one, it still has to survive the long term testing procces, (which by the way is the source of the criticism that lays the foundation for your stupid conspiracy theories). But as said they simply don't have a very good way of finding good candidates yet, because they don't know what they're doing yet (in areas like cancer and stuff).
Post 27 Sep 2007, 16:17
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
DustWolf



Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia
DustWolf
OzzY wrote:
I just found this: http://www.hyper.net/dc-howto.html
Looks quite interesting... use lots of machines to build more computer power to help solving human diseases.

Is anyone participating in such projects?


I do... BOINC. The issue is that while these projects only use idle CPU, they use a whole lot of RAM and this shows everywhere in Windows due to poorly written memory malloc functions.

So I like projects like SIMAP or uFluids, which use only very little RAM and are quite unnoticable when running, but they have no graphics either.

I use Einstein@Home for benchmarking new computers that I make because the project uses comparable pieces of actual data, which provides realistic processing comparison (because the data is real, it is 'random' and thus does not favor CPUs built to preform better in benchmarks). I also use Rosetta@Home for stress-testing computers because of it's heavy load on RAM access.

As for the results well.. not helping science, they're just experiments which yeild results. Projects like Einstein@Home provide results which are fascinating but near-useless. SIMAP-like projects on the other hand provide background processing for some data, which would not be openly accessible if it were not processed trough a project like this and thus provide very valueable data. That is why you can pick and choose.
Post 27 Sep 2007, 16:28
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
ManOfSteel



Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1154
ManOfSteel
@vid:
Quote:
agree. motivation is there, but that isn't a proof. You can't believe someone does something just because he has some reason to do it.

I know and already said there is next to no proof of a conspiracy in my last post, yet a lot seems suspect about these firms. And money has always been a primary motive for wrongdoing.

Quote:
He also must be bitch enough to do it, and must be powerful enough to do it.

Yup, you've just described the major players in pharmaceutical industry here. You know, when you have lobbies everywhere (including in the *ahem* "free" media), when you bribe and brainwash several thousand physicians and pharmacists around the globe during medical conferences (by giving them free samples, gadget like Parker pens, USB flash drives and sometimes even laptops!), when you employ hundreds of lawyers to defend your interests, when you can use some African or South Eastern hellhole as testing playground because nobody gives a s*it about it anyway and then when you have some trouble you can always bribe your victims with green bills and shut them up, there's not much you CAN'T do.

Quote:
but think of it another way: immediately as one of them finds cure and makes it public, they will all go out of bussiness. They would have to secure every single researcher worldwide under their control.

Not many small-scale, independent labs are capable of doing researches on these diseases. There are very few of these mega-corporations and they share the majority of pharmaceutical market shares on an international scale. We're talking here about the Merck family, Bayer, Pfizer and the likes who have annual revenues of at least 20 billion $. They would hardly go out of business for that since even scandals like the Rofecoxib one (that you may better know as Vioxx) can't shake the juggernauts much. Laggards will probably follow suit in a wink when they get their hands on the formula through industrial espionage. Once they have the formula (the only thing that costs billions for research), they only need a few cents to generate the actual medicine, yes, cents!

Quote:
I would be surprised if they would be powerful enough for this.

Were the US corporations not powerful enough to secure the most brilliant German scientists after WWII and then Soviet scientists after the fall of the USSR? Well, we have a very similar situation here but instead of one country, we have a few corporations to deal with and a few "big brains" to attract (pay them more than they are already paid).
Post 28 Sep 2007, 11:24
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
ManOfSteel wrote:
You know, when you have lobbies everywhere (including in the *ahem* "free" media), when you bribe and brainwash several thousand physicians and pharmacists around the globe during medical conferences (by giving them free samples, gadget like Parker pens, USB flash drives and sometimes even laptops!), when you employ hundreds of lawyers to defend your interests, when you can use some African or South Eastern hellhole as testing playground because nobody gives a s*it about it anyway and then when you have some trouble you can always bribe your victims with green bills and shut them up, there's not much you CAN'T do.

if this was happening, you could collect enough proofs of this happening.
You could list lies by media that deny real research, you could get proofs of those bribes, you could list lawsuits that were hiding something, you could collect evidence in "African/South Eastern hellhole" etc. If this was happening, I believe evidence would be collected. Of course, I doubt it would be made public by media, but it would be possible to find evidence. So, to prove your point, you should really provide some evidence. It *must* exist, if what you say is true.

Quote:
Not many small-scale, independent labs are capable of doing researches on these diseases. There are very few of these mega-corporations and they share the majority of pharmaceutical market shares on an international scale. We're talking here about the Merck family, Bayer, Pfizer and the likes who have annual revenues of at least 20 billion $. They would hardly go out of business for that since even scandals like the Rofecoxib one (that you may better know as Vioxx) can't shake the juggernauts much. Laggards will probably follow suit in a wink when they get their hands on the formula through industrial espionage. Once they have the formula (the only thing that costs billions for research), they only need a few cents to generate the actual medicine, yes, cents!

sorry, my knowledge of situation on medical "market" (sad to call it so) is very poor. But I doubt there could ever be some single formula to cure cancer.

Also, if you study deeper what cancer is, there is basically no "cure" to it, after it spreads.. You would have to replace DNA in all cells (currently impossible), or kill all bad cells (that is done now), or prevent such damaged cells to replicate. Maybe you can stop cancer, but not cure it.

Quote:
Were the US corporations not powerful enough to secure the most brilliant German scientists after WWII and then Soviet scientists after the fall of the USSR? Well, we have a very similar situation here but instead of one country, we have a few corporations to deal with and a few "big brains" to attract (pay them more than they are already paid).

I was talking about humanists sciences who could publish their discoveries against will of their bosses.
Post 28 Sep 2007, 22:02
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
OzzY



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1029
Location: Everywhere
OzzY
I need cure for baldness NOW!
I can't become bald before having a girldfriend. Crying or Very sad

They can cure so many things... why can't they make my hair grow back before it's too late?
Post 29 Sep 2007, 15:12
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ManOfSteel



Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1154
ManOfSteel
Quote:
if this was happening, you could collect enough proofs of this happening.

Conspiracies generally have one thing in common: concealment. Besides, if it's relatively easy to prove someone is doing something, it becomes quite tricky to prove that person is trying not to do something, which happens to be the case here. As years and decades pass by, it becomes more and more obvious that little is done to find any answers. I can always pretend they're just not too bright to find the good ones but then, when I look at how good they have become at killing thousands in a few days or even hours or at spying entire populations on a world-wide scale, I get to question more and more if the matter is only about a lack of intelligence.

Quote:
You could list lies by media that deny real research, you could get proofs of those bribes, you could list lawsuits that were hiding something, you could collect evidence in "African/South Eastern hellhole" etc. If this was happening, I believe evidence would be collected. Of course, I doubt it would be made public by media, but it would be possible to find evidence. So, to prove your point, you should really provide some evidence. It *must* exist, if what you say is true.

Actually I was only trying to show you how powerful pharmaceutical firms are.
The "half-masked" bribes are there; I personally know living proofs (acquaintances and relatives).
There are the numerous lawsuits against third world countries (eg: India, Philippines, South Africa) for illegal use and manufacturing of generics and infringement of trademark laws (cancer, AIDS and heart diseases).
There are examples of not so legal or ethical AIDS experiments (unfortunately I don't remember what company) on healthy African women who were tricked (because of ignorance) into believing they were given a cure against AIDS, thus indirectly tricking them into having unprotected sexual relations. Some of them were given placebos. The company took blood samples every few months to check early signs of infection. Some African governments protested when they discovered it. The company stopped the experiment, but some of the "test subjects" were already infected.
Pfizer used a Nigerian pediatric clinic to test one of their new antibiotics without even asking their guinea pigs.
There's also Bayer's infected blood case where hemophilia drugs were sold that actually infected patients with HIV and killed thousands.
There is the Vioxx scandal I talked about. For years, the medicine caused hundreds of thousand of cardiac arrests, a lot of them fatal (~ 50.000). The FDA (the federal organization that regulates drugs) quietly warned about its side effects, but didn't remove it from the market. And you know, when your doctor prescribes a medicine, you're not going to ask him if it's going to kill you! It was only removed after a woman accused the firm of killing her husband. It was the only recognized case of dangerous side effects, the women was paid a few millions to shut up. The company still continues its normal business. By the time the medicine was removed from the market it had already made 2 billions of profits.
And you have dozen more cases like that with the biggest and most respected firms. These firms are killing and endangering thousands, here and there, on and on, lobbying governments and public institutions and remaining in business untouched.

Quote:
But I doubt there could ever be some single formula to cure cancer.

Of course, every type of cancer probably has its own cure, but I was just giving a hypothetical example about just one drug.

Quote:
Also, if you study deeper what cancer is, there is basically no "cure" to it, after it spreads.. You would have to replace DNA in all cells (currently impossible), or kill all bad cells (that is done now), or prevent such damaged cells to replicate.

On the contrary, it is very possible. A virus (or any similar delivery agent) from which the pathogenic element has been removed, could be altered in such a way that it would insert brand new cell components (contained in its own nucleus) thus repairing damaged cells. A person would heal at most in a few weeks as the delivery agent spreads through his body. That method is known since the beginnings of genetic engineering in early nineties. Today, and more than ever before, we have all the knowledge and technology necessary for that.

Quote:
Maybe you can stop cancer, but not cure it.

Maybe a very first step for scientists, physicians and pharmacists, even before trying to find a cure, is to stop manufacturing, prescribing and selling carcinogenic medicines like those creams and lotions containing molecules such as hydroquinone (between a lot of other dangerous molecules still in use today).

Quote:
I was talking about humanists sciences who could publish their discoveries against will of their bosses.

Virtually every known and publicly respected medical magazine and paper is sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. It would be like questioning the present social/economical system in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal!
The scientific community (not only medical) is very conservative and elitist. Anyone trying to defy it by proposing something new, innovative and too revolutionary for mainstream scientists is labeled as a daydreamer, is attacked personally and professionally, has his own research ridiculed and even falsified. The first to play that game are scientific magazines. I've seen it more than once in the world-famous French magazine "Science & Vie" for instance. One day the guy has a secure job as long as he's obedient, the next he's a pariah who finds not even a publisher or editor for his work because these are worried about their image and their financing and have no business to do with a "circus clown".


I made a quick search and found some interesting articles about a few different subjects:

Revealed: how drug firms 'hoodwink' medical journals

What Can We Learn from Medical Whistleblowers

The Pharmaceutical Industry's Influence on Physician Behavior and Health Care Costs

Strong Medicine for Doctors

How drug lobbyists influence doctors

Drug Lobby Second to None

Drug Industry Scandal a 'Crisis'

Nigeria suing Pfizer over study of drug

AMA Council Suggests Way To Reduce Research Bias

Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials.

The Pharmaceutical Racket
Post 30 Sep 2007, 08:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ATV



Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 109
Location: Finland
ATV
I have been in searching Fermat divisors over 2 years
http://www.prothsearch.net/fermat.html and http://www.fermatsearch.org/ last update 2 years ago Sad

More Distributed Computing Projects http://www.distributedcomputing.info/projects.html

_________________
6213186413*2^605+1 divides Fermat F(600) and 121531*2^30260+1 divides Fermat F(30256)
Post 02 Oct 2007, 07:20
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.