It has for me somewhat of an engineering/mathematical/security value.
Is boinc just purely science? no other field?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It has for me somewhat of an engineering/mathematical/security value.
Is boinc just purely science? no other field?
BOINC is not purely science, no.
From the whitepaper in development:
BOINC is not purely science, that's why we have the whitelisting process where the community decides which projects are worthy of being rewarded GRC.
So it seems moo! technically is a valid boinc project. we only delist if its unsecure, abused and/or no work right?
until we get a process going, yes. it is unfair to use a single project to discuss an entire process.
If brute forcing passwords holds magnitude validity then maybe it's time to relist Bitcoin Utopia again. At least that project has a real world application.
a major point is that we cannot hold a single project hostage and use that as the basis of a conversation
I think delisting should hold the same conversation basis as whitelisting, especially when it comes to projects which do the same work as previously unlisted projects.
yes, but we seem to be building the first process for whitelisting at this very moment. poll was just started.
This conversation is being about Moo! instead of about the proposal and process. this is productive when it comes to considering Moo!, but not productive when it comes to every project afterwards.
i would argue that we should stop thinking about individual projects for a moment and talk about the proposal and process. just for a moment.
Yes to this. I would love to "suspend" all the project level votes until the whitelist proposal has a chance to go through.