1) Message boards : Number crunching : forum inaccesible through front page links (Message 22867)
Posted 4 Sep 2011 by Butteroven
Steady on, John. LHC@Home's been quasi-dead for years: the new admins haven't had a week to get the out-of-the-box web interface ironed out, and already we're comparing CERN to mere rocket scientists?

Admins, a working forum index would be a great help. Thanks.

2) Message boards : Number crunching : We will NOT be crunching the results of the LHC collisions (Message 22790)
Posted 9 Jun 2011 by Butteroven

I don\\\\\\\'t care what reasons they give for not making the data public. Any excuse is fine with me as long as the data is kept out of the hands of rogue states like North Korea, Libya and the USA.

Really. Could you have worked any harder or been more clumsy jamming your little political whine into our nonrelated discussion?

Yes. Let\'s get back to the completely rational discussion of how we\'re fobbed off with meaningless busywork while CERN process all the GOOD data in a super-encrypted science-theft-proof bunker...
3) Message boards : LHC@home Science : New data available? (Message 22771)
Posted 6 Jun 2011 by Butteroven
...not to mention all those so-called \"hadrons\"...
4) Message boards : LHC@home Science : ANTIMATTER!!! (Message 22623)
Posted 19 Nov 2010 by Butteroven
I doubt we can claim any input, as it\'s not actually a LHC experiment.

Nevertheless, GO CERN! It\'s always good to see particle physics in the news. I like to think it means a few more people taking an interest in fundamental research, a few less people blindly fearing The Black Hole That Will Eat Us All.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : 10 second work unit (Strange Quirks - Not Quarks) (Message 22451)
Posted 8 Aug 2010 by Butteroven
I have also (luckily) picked up a handful of new wus this month, all of which have terminated in seconds with \"Compute error\". The same units re-sent have sometimes failed similarly, but have all eventually come back \"Success\" after short or long runs. (A quick look suggests to me processor type wasn\'t a factor in whether they ran or failed, for the record.)

I\'m used to wall-crashing micro-runs, but compute errors have been uncommon (certainly not this common). I\'d say the latest Sixtrack has picked up a bug or two. I suspect these little work batches have been teed up specifically to find them.

©2024 CERN