Paul D. Buck wrote: > > Wasn't me that said so ... it was you (and I quote): > > "There are also some fairly major drawbacks, and that is why I think > it won't be implemented as is. First, it's immediately deflationary. > The average host that connected to s...@home today earns 292 credits > per day, which is significantly more than 100. There would be strong > (perhaps irresistible) demand for projects to keep their current > credit scheme for as long as possible. " > > http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=45024&nowrap=true#705408
Ah, at last we get to the bottom of the mystery. Paul, you're looking at the wrong script. That post of Eric's, dated 29 January 2008, is a commentary on a proposal by David which was never implemented. The suggestion is that David's script, not Eric's, would have been deflationary. The script which the rest of us are talking about was coded by Eric some six months later (22 July 2008), and has been running at SETI and SETI Beta ever since - I don't know how many other projects have taken it up. That script is *NOT* deflationary, except to the limited extent that Joe and I were talking about. You can check the coding yourself at http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/changeset/15661. _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
