Rosetta@home

[Lonewulf]

Intelligent radio signals from space? Yeah, right! It might be fun but there are better things to pour our energies into. As I said

Let's see. Here are two things. On one hand we have cure cancer. On the other hand we have finding a distant culture the likelihood of us ever understanding or appreciating is infinitesimal. Hummm, I can see why you would choose the later.

Disagreeing or attacking this view without elaboration is something I don't get. Look at the BOINC percentages. Most of it goes to SETI@HOME. It seems disproportionate compared to the Rosetta percentage. I am not sure if a user can choose which program he wants after downloading the overall project but it sure looks like he can from the screen shots.

Besides, if it wasn't for Marconi, how long would it have taken us to invent the radio? It seems like a huge leap in our evolution. I mean, how many people do you know can build a radio from scratch? Now given that with Fermi's Paradox, the interest in SETI kind of plummets for some people (I don't know how many).

I think discovering any life would be a huge advantage to us. I think that life includes what life has been on Earth for most of its existence. It has for the vast majority of its time been microbial.

See, here, you're making a good point without making direct insults, standing from an arrogant position, or trying to downgrade your opponents.

Calling your opponents "dumbasses" does nothing to convince them, and only stirs up emotion and anger. If you put the other party on the defensive, there is little hope to rescue them from that position. But it doesn't matter at all if you do not listen to their points and comprehend them.

I personally do agree that it's very unlikely that we'll find advanced alien life anywhere nearby. While I wouldn't claim outright that it has to be necessarily rare, I do admit that the likelihood is rather high that it is. Further, I do agree that even if there were advanced alien life, it's just as likely that they use a different kind of technology than radios, nor invent them. I mean, most discoveries are, by definition, accidental; you don't go looking for a discovery.

Looking at all of this, I still don't necessarily consider SETI to be a waste of time. I'd have to look at the rate they improve the technology they work with. From what I've heard, SETI has taken technology and revamped it, giving it improvements and upgrades. So I see that it has an advantage.

But I do agree that SETI could (and probably should) go about their job at a different rate they do; at least develop technology to send a signal farther, so a far-off chance becomes a little less far-off.

Now, look at my post. At no point did I insult you, or take a pot shot at you, or suggest you're unintelligent or anything else. The reason why is because you avoided doing the same in your own post and argument. Law of reciprocity.

Now, if only you could use reason and unfaulty logic in the future... but I'm not really holding out hope.

[Bill_Thompson]

Marconi did not invent the radio, Nikola Tesla did. There was a lawsuit over this distinction that settled in favor of Nikola Tesla around 1943, several months after his death.

Cool. Something more for me to look up. Thanks for sharing (if you are serious). Something tells me you are joking around.

[Lance]

Teri doesn't joke about Nikola Tesla.

Invention

USPTO Patent Decision: Wireless TelegraphyThe identity of the original inventor of radio, at the time called wireless telegraphy, is contentious. The controversy over who invented the radio, with the benefit of hindsight, can be broken down as follows:

Q1: Who invented 'wireless transmission of data' (spark-gap radio)?
A1: Nikola Tesla holds the US patent for the invention of the radio.
Q2: Who invented amplitude-modulated (AM) radio, so that more than one station can send signals (as opposed to spark-gap radio, where one transmitter covers the entire bandwidth of the spectrum)?
A2: Reginald Fessenden [1] and Lee de Forest.
Q3: Who invented frequency-modulated (FM) radio, so that an audio signal can avoid "static," that is, interference from electrical equipment and atmospherics?
A3: Edwin H. Armstrong and Lee de Forest.

[Bill_Thompson]

Why do you always use [logical fallacies]?

I do not think so.

Fermi's Paradox

Which has been proved to be a logical fallacy.

You cannot be serious. Try keeping your thoughts on the logical side and keep it from passing through your corpus callosum. Applying Robert A. Freitas' logic you could say that there could be a Santa Claus. Did you read his link or did you just find it and decide to splash it up here? I think Freitas is relying on the fact that most people cannot understand calculus. I can.

Notice that Freitas publishes this stuff in Science Fiction magazines. Not science magazines.

I will share this with the folks at The Planetary Society. Just as I give Cyndi a good laugh. You will give them a good laugh as well.

[Lance]

[Fermi's Paradox,] which has been proved to be a logical fallacy.

You cannot be serious.

People might actually believe you if you would just admit you had no understanding of what you read instead of trying to attack the author. Everyone here can see right through you, and tells you that all the time. Why don't you ever get it?

[Bill_Thompson]

Lance, look where he published his "findings" on that link:

R. A. Freitas, "Fermi's Paradox: A Real Howler," Issac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine 8(September 1984):30-44.

Give me a break, man.

[Lance]

You failed to indicate why it matters.

[Lonewulf]

Ah; so you're attacking the messenger, not the message, right, Bill?

Once again, how are you not a hypocrite?

Oh, and Gillianren explained on the BAUT how the "Santa Clause" comparison did not work. A pity you didn't listen to her.

I'm not going to rehash what has already been explained, knowing it would do no good.

[teri tait]

Marconi did not invent the radio, Nikola Tesla did. There was a lawsuit over this distinction that settled in favor of Nikola Tesla around 1943, several months after his death.

Cool. Something more for me to look up. Thanks for sharing (if you are serious). Something tells me you are joking around.

I never joke about Nikola Tesla, he's my #1 hero. Its pretty well documented online, you should be able to google it if you want to read up on it.

[FZR1KG]

Why do you always use [logical fallacies]?

I do not think so.

Fermi's Paradox

Which has been proved to be a logical fallacy.

You cannot be serious. Try keeping your thoughts on the logical side and keep it from passing through your corpus callosum. Applying Robert A. Freitas' logic you could say that there could be a Santa Claus. Did you read his link or did you just find it and decide to splash it up here? I think Freitas is relying on the fact that most people cannot understand calculus. I can.

Applying that logic, Bill might be intelligent....... we will continue to search however low the probability may be

Here's a tip so you don't come off like a complete idiot.. Applying your reasoning would mean NO NEW DISCOVERIES will ever be made. There can never be a cure for cancer, because we haven't found one, doesn't make that much sense now does it Bill?

Lance, look where he published his "findings" on that link:

R. A. Freitas, "Fermi's Paradox: A Real Howler," Issac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine 8(September 1984):30-44.

Give me a break, man.

Notice that Freitas publishes this stuff in Science Fiction magazines. Not science magazines.

I will share this with the folks at The Planetary Society. Just as I give Cyndi a good laugh. You will give them a good laugh as well.

Ahhh, I remember you now Bill, Mr "engines work on explosions"..... while you are at it, post that there too, give some automotive engineers a good laugh.

The logic of the argument is correct, completely. If you fail to understand it then it makes no difference where, when or how its published.

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

O, the irony.

FermiLab has its own SETI-program: The Fermilab Dyson Sphere search program.

[teri tait]

Hey Bill, here's some information on the invention of the radio and the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Nikola Tesla in 1943:


Radio invented by Tesla

And here

And here

Its pretty interesting, as the first link points out, to wonder how often history books are incorrect or incomplete.

[azazul]

Look at the BOINC percentages. Most of it goes to SETI@HOME.

You have not read a word I have typed have you? BOINC was created by the people who created SETI@Home. Berkeley Open Infrastructure Network Computing. Notice that Berkeley at the beginning? Now, what is SETI@Home's website? http://setiathome.berkeley.edu. Bill, this is not a coincedence. SETI@Home ran for several years by itself, then the people in charge of it decided distributed computing could be used for other projects, so they created BOINC. Also, Rosetta is about 1 year old, SETI is like 7 years old, so comparing the number of users is stupid.

By the way, why don't you post the link to your account on Rosetta@Home?

Or do you not think the project is worth your time? Because I sure did, which is why I founded a teamfor it (unfortunately, I do not have enough computers to run it and Einstein@Home, Climateprediction.net, SETI@Home, ufluids.net, Predictor@Home, LHC@Home). But I didn't feel the need to claim everyone else is stupid for not running a specific project.

[Bill_Thompson]

Notice the idiotic thread Lance started to divert attention from the fact that that Science Fiction fan did not show that Fermi's Paradox was a logical falacy. I think Lance does not understand a ad hominim attack as well has grasping fundamental calculus.

He started a poll for people to vote about me.

[Bill_Thompson]

Look at the BOINC percentages. Most of it goes to SETI@HOME.

You have not read a word I have typed have you? BOINC was created by the people who created SETI@Home. Berkeley Open Infrastructure Network Computing. Notice that Berkeley at the beginning? Now, what is SETI@Home's website? http://setiathome.berkeley.edu. Bill, this is not a coincedence. SETI@Home ran for several years by itself, then the people in charge of it decided distributed computing could be used for other projects, so they created BOINC. Also, Rosetta is about 1 year old, SETI is like 7 years old, so comparing the number of users is stupid.

By the way, why don't you post the link to your account on Rosetta@Home?

Or do you not think the project is worth your time? Because I sure did, which is why I founded a teamfor it (unfortunately, I do not have enough computers to run it and Einstein@Home, Climateprediction.net, SETI@Home, ufluids.net, Predictor@Home, LHC@Home). But I didn't feel the need to claim everyone else is stupid for not running a specific project.

I am just saying that their web sites show the percentage of effort or resources spent on different BOINC projects.

But thanks for the details. I appreciate that.

[Bill_Thompson]

O, the irony.

FermiLab has its own SETI-program: The Fermilab Dyson Sphere search program.

Cool.

Infared Astronomy? Are they looking for laser signals. I wish them luck !

[Bill_Thompson]

You failed to indicate why it matters.

If you read his page you would see that he does not prove that Fermi's Paradox is a logical falacy.

Lance, you do not understand fundamental calculus.

You also do not understand what Ad Hominim means.

[Enzo]

Are you suggesting that logic is done with calculus?

[FZR1KG]

The limit as stupidity aproaches infinity is that ETI probability aproaches 0

Yup, logic requires calculus

You know, America Indians don't exist, I have proof using Bills reasoning. If they were around prior to the discovery of America they should have been visiting us. Oh, but that means there is no America either, so if thats the case then Bill who claims to be from America doesn't exist either.

But wait there's more......taken to its logical conclusion, hell, nothing outside of the womb can exist then either so we are all non existant. So why am I even bothering to try to explain something to a non existant thought experiment......

[Lonewulf]

He started a poll for people to vote about me.

Well, yes. You continue to think that you're popular or well-liked. You have stated as much in the past.

Look at the poll results. You'll see just how much people don't like you, your hypocricy, and your arrogance here.

[Lance]

You also do not understand what Ad Hominim means.

This is the first time I think I have ever seen you be right.

I do, however, know what ad hominem means. It is one of your favorite argument styles, and one of the few argument styles you actually understand and respond to. Here, let me give you an example of one, just so you're sure I really understand the concept:

"Bill Thompson's positions on most topics should be ignored because they are generally based on ignorance and a general lack of understanding of the world around him. He also doesn't know how to evaluate evidence, or even what constitutes real evidence in a scientific sense. When shown to be wrong about something he will not accept it, but will instead attack the person who showed him to be wrong."

There. Does that qualify as an ad hominem? Is it still considered an ad hominem even if it's true?

[Lonewulf]

Ad Hominem... hmm... let's see... how about a claim that the BAUT is populated only by people that haven't finished college, don't know a thing about science, and are all geeks that are obsessed with Star Trek?

Does it count as Ad Hominem when it's not only not true, but is a generalization of over 11,000 people?

Oh, also, don't forget that Billy Boy called us all dumbasses for not running the software he thinks is "right". Is that Ad Hominem too?

I could list thousands more examples, but I really have better things to do with my day.

Yes, Bill Thompson, you know the Art of the Ad Hominem (and it is art - the same way as some people claim that throwing shit onto a canvas is art).

[FZR1KG]

Lance, look where he published his "findings" on that link:

R. A. Freitas, "Fermi's Paradox: A Real Howler," Issac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine 8(September 1984):30-44.

Give me a break, man.

A fine example of logic if ever I saw one

Bet you are racist too.

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

I wonder if Billy Boy knows that Isaac Asimov was a scientist.
They do have standards, you know.

And regarding BOINC.
There are plenty of idle CPU-cycles to go around.
I bet all these projects will meet their goals.

[azazul]

Look at the BOINC percentages. Most of it goes to SETI@HOME.

You have not read a word I have typed have you? BOINC was created by the people who created SETI@Home. Berkeley Open Infrastructure Network Computing. Notice that Berkeley at the beginning? Now, what is SETI@Home's website? http://setiathome.berkeley.edu. Bill, this is not a coincedence. SETI@Home ran for several years by itself, then the people in charge of it decided distributed computing could be used for other projects, so they created BOINC. Also, Rosetta is about 1 year old, SETI is like 7 years old, so comparing the number of users is stupid.

By the way, why don't you post the link to your account on Rosetta@Home?

Or do you not think the project is worth your time? Because I sure did, which is why I founded a teamfor it (unfortunately, I do not have enough computers to run it and Einstein@Home, Climateprediction.net, SETI@Home, ufluids.net, Predictor@Home, LHC@Home). But I didn't feel the need to claim everyone else is stupid for not running a specific project.

I am just saying that their web sites show the percentage of effort or resources spent on different BOINC projects.

But thanks for the details. I appreciate that.

That's it? That is your response to me? Keep in mind that I run SETI@Home, I don't know of anyone on this site that runs it other than me. So you have basically been attacking me personally with all of your self-righteous crap about SETI@Home, and believe me, I am as far from your characterization of the people who run SETI@Home as anyone can be.