Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Hosting Problems For distributed.net

Hemos posted more than 12 years ago | from the need-to-find-a-new-home dept.

The Internet 214

Yoda2 writes "I've always found the distributed.net client to be a scientific, practical use for my spare CPU cycles. Unfortunately, it looks like they lost their hosting and need some help. The complete story is available on their main page but I've included a snippet with their needs below: 'Our typical bandwidth usage is 3Mb/s, and reliable uptime is of course essential. Please e-mail dbaker@distributed.net if you think you may be able to help us in this area.' As they are already having hosting problems, I hate to /. them, but their site is copyrighted so I didn't copy the entire story. Please help if you can." Before there was SETI@Home, Distributed.net was around - hopefully you can still join the team.

cancel ×

214 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

So 3Mb/s huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227064)

Average is not so interesting as peak is.

Now we will find out peak bandwidth usage, won't we?

Gawd No (0)

ObitMan (550793) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227065)

That would suck if they went out of business

Re:Gawd No (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227147)

Your journal link [slashdot.org] is broken. For non-you users, you need to put your UID in the link. You can see your own journal with your UID-less link because you are you, but I, not being you, get an error message.

HTH.

Suggestion (2, Informative)

Jouster (144775) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227066)

Could they just move the project over to SourceForge?

Jouster

Re:Suggestion (5, Informative)

hkhanna (559514) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227090)

No because the distributed.net client needs to communicate on it's own port in whatever internal protocol it uses. That's what causes the bandwidth usage, not the downloading of the client, if that's what you think.

You can't put your own server software on sourceforge's servers, at least not to my knowledge, so all sourceforge would be good for is hosting the client downloads...which it might actually already do. Hope that answers your question.
Hargun

Re:Suggestion (4, Informative)

BovineOne (119507) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227431)

Finding new hosting for our central "keymaster" is what the issue is. We have enough "fullsevers" for serving the computational data to clients (See http://n0cgi.distributed.net/rc5-proxyinfo.html [distributed.net] ).

FWIW, Our clients actually can speak a pure HTTP protocol for requesting data, allowing a simple /cgi-bin/rc5.cgi script handle direct serving, but the default communications mode is a more compact raw binary mode.

Re:Suggestion (1)

haeger (85819) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227097)

I dont think so since sourceforge is for open source development and last time I checked they had atleast some portions of their code closed to prevent people from cheating.

I could be wrong though and I'm sure someone will point that out if so. Perhaps you could have some parts closed even on sourceforge.

Soccer manager: Hattrick [hattrick.org]

frist post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227067)

fp

Re:frist post (-1)

Ralph Malph Alpha (551824) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227069)

Close. Same minute close. But close just means "loser". And you're an AC, so you couldn't have gotten it anydamnway.

Re:frist post (0, Offtopic)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227075)

I ought to have left the Post Anonymously checkbox clear, huh?

D.S.

Re:frist post (-1)

Ralph Malph Alpha (551824) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227115)


What the hell is a post anonymously box? My karma is in the negative infinity area, i don't know what the heck you are talkin about. actaully I do, but i'm so damn brilliant that i have to fake ignorance in order to pass as a normal human being and not the fricken superhuman genius that i really am.

What's distributed.net? Do they have prono there? what's a hosting problem? I dont understand these crazy things, itz magic, leave me alone cant you see that I"M busy.

Re:frist post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227117)

I'm am awed by your feigned ignorance. Perhaps one day I can feign ignorance as well as you.

I just don't know...

Distributed hosting? (5, Interesting)

gnovos (447128) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227072)

Maybe they should go in for distributed hosting, like say one machine that just houses the IP address and a few thousand mirrors that the requests can be directed to as they come in. Not only is it a project that is just ASKING to be performed by distributed.net, but if they make some catchy point and click (i.e. EASY to use) clients that anyone with a large following can use, we might see the end of such things as Slashdot subscriptions and a resurgence of the "community" feel of the web.

Re:Distributed hosting? (2, Insightful)

doubtless (267357) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227094)

Distributed computing != distributed hosting... I don't really know what you mean exactly by distrubted hosting. You have to always get all your data to back to the 'central location' to finally compile the 'answer'.

Pretty much same concept as any clustered computing, the pipes are always important, and no, u can't 'distribute' the connections.

Re:Distributed hosting? (2)

zilym (3470) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227134)

Why the hell not? Machine A grabs a huge chunk of
keyspace off of the main server. Machine B
takes a subportion of the keyspace from Machine A.
Machine C takes a subportion of keyspace from
Machine D, ad nauseum. When a machine completes
the checking of its key blocks, it reports it back to
the machine it was acquired from for consolidation.
When the main server hears back from Machine A,
it is a tiny packet saying keys in this entire range have
all been checked and returned negative. One small
packet instead of hundreds from each of the
individual machines that actually processed them.

This is only one simple configuration for example
purposes.

You're still gonna need a host, but the
bandwidth required will be nothing.

Re:Distributed hosting? (2, Informative)

BovineOne (119507) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227393)

This is effectively what we already do with our keymaster, fullserver, personal proxy tiering. Personal proxies can be several layers deep if needed (many of our teams set up their own team servers using personal proxies).

Re:Distributed hosting? (2)

itsnotme (20905) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227110)

The problem with that is, they need a way to make sure that nobody is interfering with the blocks that are being processed, they dont need people cheating and so on, and they need a way to validate the blocks .. thats why they have their own cache's and so on

Re:Distributed hosting? (1)

slinted (374) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227129)

Distrubeted hosting sounds like it would be good news for Dnet but it would mean some complications
Each mirror-site's code would need to have its own verification scheme to validate someones completed blocks (which i think they have now). And it would have to be tamper-proof and/or trusted mirrors since faking a "done with block, this one wasn't it" in the location of the right answer (stat whores) would be a true setback for the project.
Since the full block information wouldn't ever be compiled together on a central server, we might have to give up some of the details from stats. Not having all the block by block count of every persons activity being centralized for stat-computation would probably cut back their bandwidth considerably.

Multiple problems (5, Insightful)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227151)

There are numerous things you just couldn't "distribute." The keys have to be served from somewhere, they must be tracked in real-time from somewhere, and they must be accepted/processed somewhere. Stats must be compiled and then put into a single database. To distribute this to multiple computers would cause the amount of bandwidth used to rise to an extreme level, far beyond what it is now. (ie. send out the info, let each node process it, receive the data from each node, hope to Christ it's right)

Next, the integrity of the project gets called into question the moment you begin allowing clients to check processed blocks. The number of fals positives could easily shoot through the roof. Also, a computer with bad memory or simply running a faulty OS (such as Win9x/ME) could overlook a true positive, thereby virtually obliterating the project (ie. "we're at 100% completion with no result, guess we start over?")

As stated above, stats would be impossible to do in this manner, and the same applies for key distrobution. One could argue that the total keys be distributed amoung thousands of nodes and handed out from there, but you create more problems then you solve. You still need a centralized management location to keep track of keys that have or have not been tested. Imagine a node going offline permanently or simply losing the keys it was handed. Suddenly, a large block of keys is missing. As it stands now, the keymaster simply re-issues the keys to someone else after a couple of weeks of no response from the client it sent the original blocks to. Under a distributed format, the keymaster would have to keep track of which keys went to which key distributor, which of those came back, which of those need to be redistributed, where they... (you get the message.)

Next you run into another problem of integrity. What's to stop each distributed keymaster from claiming it's own client is the one that completed all blocks submitted to it. Consider this example, central keymaster sends out 200,000 blocks of keys to keymaster node 101. Keymaster node 101 distributes these keys to a bunch of clients which process the blocks, then send them back to keymaster node 101. Keymaster node 101, which has been modded slightly, then modifies each data block, changing the user id to that of the keymaster's owner, thereby making it appear that any block coming back from keymaster 101 was processed by keymaster 101. It might be easy to spot, but then how to you find out who to give credit to?

The webpage doesn't attract the majority of the bandwidth; the projects do. Distributing the projects would be disasterous, as many have already tried taking advantage of the current system to increase their block yields through modded clients. Luckily, this is easy to spot for now. Under a distributed system, this would be next to impossible. All this, and I've yet to make mention of the fact that the code would have to be completely re-written to work alongside a custom P2P application, which would add months of development to a project that probably only has weeks or months left in it.

In short, someone host the damn thing, k? :)

Re:Multiple problems (1)

rastan (43536) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227448)

To distribute this to multiple computers would cause the amount of bandwidth used to rise to an extreme level, far beyond what it is now. (ie. send out the info, let each node process it, receive the data from each node, hope to Christ it's right)

Of course there are protocols for distributed computing by which you need not hope to Christ, but can be quite confident that your results are correct. Good ones can compute formulae and withstand up to one less than 1/3 of the participants being active traitors. But on the other hand, their bit complexity is not exactly lowering your total amount of communication either...

YHBT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227152)

I assert that this post is a troll. I also assert that YHBT.

This message has been brought to you by the troll committee of the .test community. Cherish our balls.

Re:Distributed hosting? (1)

kiowa (5743) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227154)

Well, there is the Freenet Project [freenetproject.org] .

Re:Distributed hosting? (3, Informative)

BovineOne (119507) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227387)

Our network already uses a somewhat distributed model to spread out bandwidth demand as best as we can. You can see a bit of it if you look at our Proxy Status page at http://n0cgi.distributed.net/rc5-proxyinfo.html

Each of the servers listed are in in different DNS rotation grouped roughly by geographically named groups (that try to take in general network topology/connectivity). The servers listed there (known as "fullservers") handle all of the data communication needs requested by clients, and the fullservers in turn keep in contact with the "keymaster". The keymaster is the server responsible for the coordination of unique work between all of the fullservers and assigning out large regions of keyspace to the fullservers (which in turn split up the regions and redistribute to clients).

The hardware that we had hosted at Insync/TexasNet was actually 3 machines which together served several roles: our keymaster, one of our dns secondaries, our irc network hub, one of our three web content mirrors, and our ftp software distribution mirror (for actual client downloads).

It's unfortunate that the change in management at Insync/TexasNet caused them to want to re-evaluate all of the free-loading machines that were receiving donated services (there were apparently several others besides us) and cut off anyone who wasn't paying. Regardless, it's a touch economy and companies that want to survive have to look at where their costs are going and do their best to cut spending.

Re:Distributed viruses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227417)

Why would anyone want to run such ditributed programs. A better potential virus vehicle I have never seen. Why would anyone entrust such code to run on their computers? How secure is the main site against attack (where the client program is downloaded from)?

"I hate to /. them but..."? (5, Funny)

flipflapflopflup (311459) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227076)

You've now got 10,000 readers hovering over the link, "Ooh, should I, shouldn't I?", then thinking f**k it and clicking anyway.

A slow, painful, prolonged, /.'ing ;o)

Stopping three quarters of the way (3, Informative)

Soft (266615) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227084)

The RC5-64 challenge is currently [distributed.net] at 73%, moving fast. Can you imagine the project shutting down just now?

Re:Stopping three quarters of the way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227214)

Assigning keyspace chunks to people requires negligeable amounts of bandwidth if the chunks are large enough.

Re:Stopping three quarters of the way (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227303)

Can you imagine them hitting 100% and realizing that due to a software bug, the correct key was already found but no one realized it?

Re:Stopping three quarters of the way (1)

Peyna (14792) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227392)

Better yet, they never found the correct key due to a software bug, therefore, they have to fix it and start all over.

Quote of the Day [QOTD] (0, Flamebait)

CaptCanuk (245649) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227092)

Straight off Distributed.net's [distributed.net] main page:
"Unauthorized Worm: We have recently learned that an infectious worm has begun circulating around the Internet deploying copies of our dnetc client. If you are looking for information relating to this worm then visit our trojan page. "

As opposed to your "authorized" worms?!?

Re:Quote of the Day [QOTD] (1)

NinjaGaidenIIIcuts (568607) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227231)

I told that girl [coderz.net] to don't rip off fragile experimental projects.

Afterall she's a lady and she would understand that's coward action to phreack on big security holes... or not. To abuse distributed.net because exist on there big security holes.

We cannot rely on crackers' compassion, distributed.net must find a way to turn clients' security into a better level.

OMG, hang on!!! (1, Funny)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227095)

No, they can't shut down yet! I [distributed.net] have to break 10,000 in the rankings!

Good Lord, what shall I do? :(

Re:OMG, hang on!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227114)

Good thing you got that Athlon XP 1700 and 320 GB of HD, otherwise I'm sure it wouldn't be worth it to help out. You're certainly getting the most bang for your buck!

get a fucking life ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227168)

hmm ?

spam spam spam spam spam fried eggs spam and spam (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227100)

please spam this email address with everything you've got. I wanna see what you bastards can do. spooch@sympatico.ca [mailto] spooch@sympatico.ca --spooch spooch@sympatico.ca

Principles and Paradigms of Distributed Systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227102)

I believe the problem with ths cost of bandwidth can be donewith a simple system similar that found in Diablo 2. While it takes a considerable amount of bandwidth to run their servers, their is frequently a message saying "This server hosted by AT&T. While obviously this doesn't cover the cost of bandwidth completely, I'm sure that distributed.net's bandwidth provider would being willing to lessent the charges a little bit for a small banner in the client notifying the user who the service was running on.

On a slightly off topic note, while browsing Amazon earlier today, I was recommended a book by Maarten Van Steen [amazon.com] titled Distributed Systems: Principles and Paradigms [amazon.com] . while not completely on topic, I believe this book is

Distributed Hosting (1)

HerbieStone (64244) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227103)

Maybe it's time for the distributed computing power to get hosted by distributed computers?

Seriously, what is the current state of p2p-networking when serving common html-pages would be the thing to do?

Page making the same size post. (-1, Offtopic)

Big Dogs Cock (539391) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227107)

This is a carefully crafted troll to make your page the same size as it was before.

When will the editors fix this bug?

Re:Page making the same size post. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227108)

Why don't you just leave us poor readers alone. We don't want your page same-sizening here.

Re:Page making the same size post. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227127)

I've checked it out in Mozilla, IE 6 and Opera and it makes pages the same size in all of them. A serious bug.

Re:Page making the same size post. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227136)

Break out the blueberry flavored condoms we are going to be sucking the serious software bug trolls dick for days as has some sort of semen blood clot bloackage going on. Contribute the vacuum of your head good slashdot readers !!! Unite !

Location (1)

Beltza (117984) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227112)

The fact that such a big world-wide project is bound to be hosted near Austin shows that computing technology still has a long way to go...

Re:Location (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227432)

Well, not computing technology but rather population-bandwidth. Austin makes sense, or any other large data center. Europe would not make sense.

Read this now!! (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227120)

  • 2002. Slashdot publishes 1,000,000th rumor passed off as actual story. The story generates 480 comments, 263 of which agree with the article, and 107 of which point out its a rumor and are modded down as redundant. The remaining comments are all first posts.
  • 2002. CmdrTaco married to Kathleen Fent. Many geeks believe Kathleen, a purported transvestite, outmeasures CmdrTaco.
  • 2002. Slashdot parent corporation VA Research^W Linux^W Software stock worth 35 cents. Rumors that AOL, Microsoft, or even Jimmy the hobo who lives under the Longfellow Bridge may buy it.
  • 2003. VA Software bought by Microsoft for a cup of coffee and a donut. All Microsoft-critical articles mysteriously disappear from Slashdot. Bill Gates as Borg logo replaced with Bill Gates as God.
  • 2003. Papperatzi videos of Miguel de Icaza caught going down on Bill Gates in his private yacht spread across Usenet. Miguel swears that recent decisions to rename the Gnome desktop to Windows NT 6.0 have nothing to do with it.
  • 2004. CmdrTaco loses hist virginity.
  • 2004. The WIPO Troll returns again, showering Slashdot in 45,000 copies of the same post: Lick my crotch hairs. Slashdot, despite running on 18 redundant IIS/8.0 servers, buckles under the load. The term Slashdotted is replaced with WIPO-Trolled.
  • 2004. Slashdot, the last vestige of VA Research^W Linux^W Software^W Microsoft, officially shut down. Millions of screaming, unwashed geeks invade Redmond campus and lynch Bill Gates. CmdrTaco is believed to posess the only remaining copy of the Slashdot database on several hundred CD-Rs.
  • 2005. The Linux is world is shocked when Linus Torvalds and Anal Cox are found dead along with six penguins, an empty tub of crisco and several used condoms. Millions of screaming, unwashed geeks invade Redmond campus and lynch Steve Ballmer.
  • 2005. CmdrTaco rumored to have had sex again.
  • 2006. CowboiKneel found dead in hotel room with 56 pizza boxes covering his bloated corpse. Three suffocated gay prostitutes are extracted from beneath his body as police remove it with a backhoe.
  • 2007. CmdrTaco actually has sex again. With a woman.
  • 2007. BSD is still officially dying. No word on when its demise will take place.
  • 2007. CmdrTaco starts new weblog to replace Slashdot, creatively named Dotslash. Remainder of Linux users flock to the site and immediate WIPO-Troll it out of existence.
  • 2008. CmdrTaco has sex with his wife for the first time.
  • 2009. After years of living under the heel of his domineering wife, and being deprived of companyof his life-long friend, Jeff Homos Bates, CmdrTaco commits suicide. Another unwashed geek mob gathers and tears Kathleen Fent to shreds. Geeks discover Ms. Fent was indeed a woman, but dont exactly know what that means. Driven by their sexually-repressed rage, they subsequently invade Redmond again and lynch the current CEO of Microsoft, Miguel deIcaza.
  • 2009. Richard Stallman mysteriously murdered. Conspiracy theories run rampant, most involving Microsoft in some way. Invasions of Redmond campus by hordes of geeks become commonplace.
  • 2010. Stallman murder solved when Eric S. Raymond confesses. Raymond blamed the collapse of VA Research^W Linux^W Software^W Microsoft on Stallmans dogmatic insistence on prefixing every open-source project with GNU. Raymond is subsequently committed to an insane asylum, again giving the horde of geeks an excuse to raze Redmond.
  • 2010. An ex-hacker reports witnessing CmdrTaco at a gas station in Tennessee. The nearly-defunct Linux movement is rekindled as CmdrTaco sightings become common.
  • 2011. Microsoft campus burnt to the ground by screaming, unwashed geek mob after Microsoft is blamed when a Linuxhacker in Cambridge, Massachusetts spills his coffee on his pants. Microsoft undaunted as their plans to buy out the Federal Government come to fruition. Washington, D.C. renamed Microsoft Capitol 2010.

contradiction (-1)

Adolf Hitroll (562418) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227124)

As they are already having hosting problems, I hate to /. them, but their site is copyrighted so I didn't copy the entire story.

So why would I help copyright holders ?
gimme one reason, motherfscker !

and btw, if this was that crucial, would VA Lin^WSof^Wwhatever have swallowed them so, don't even insinuate you care...

Dnet, is it useful ? (1, Flamebait)

linzeal (197905) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227130)

What has it accomplished besides searching a keyspace with a known length and golumb rulers? Seti@home, cancer research, or that distributed raytracing screen saver is far more more useful.

Re:Dnet, is it useful ? (1)

Nipok Nek (87328) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227164)

seti@home will only be useful if it finds something.

Dnet has already confirmed the longest golumb ruler of length 24 and is working on discovering the longest ruler length 25. This information is IMMEDIATLY useful to people in many fields of science. I'd point you to their OGR page, but for the fear of /.'ing them.

Re:Dnet, is it useful ? (2, Insightful)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227187)

Seti@home searchs a fairly insignificant portion of the sky for a completely insignificant number of signals with an un-optimized application which does little more than make pretty color pictures on the screen.

Cancer research? I've yet to see a viable distributed project for cancer research. By that, I mean an organized effort with real data, a complete and concise goal, and a clean method for reaching that goal. Distributed raytracing? More pretty pictures on the computer screen.

You want to draw pretty pictures, I want to brute force an encrypted message to prove current laws regarding encryption are draconian and need to be changed immediately. Gee, I can't imagine why anyone would think dnet is more usefull than raytracing....

Re:Dnet, is it useful ? (1)

linzeal (197905) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227277)

Um, insignificant portion of the sky? Do you know how large the milky way is let alone the local galactic cluster? An even smaller field of view is just fine for a search for et.

I don't run any of the cancer dist. projects so someone else can answer that better than me.

What you are doing is hardly worth the effort. It would be like someone memorizing an entire DVD in binary than repeating it to fight the absurdities of the DMCA. Everyone knows how large the keyspace is and no one is surprized that it is taking them this long to find the key.

Seti@home has potential but I agree it needs to look for multi band signals at the least as it currently looks exclusively in the hydrogen emission band. It would be like people in france not having boats and looking across the ocean at britain expecting to see a fire that reaches a certain height above the ground, it is a very limited idea of what we should be looking for.

Re:Dnet, is it useful ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227298)

10s of thousands pcs are bruteforcing 1line for months, whats the point of that unless a hacker/cracker/whatever can run his password lists through distributed.net or on a multibilliondollar computer? i know pcs will one day do that in a sec. folding@HOME [stanford.edu] seems way more usefull IMO

Re:Dnet, is it useful ? (4, Informative)

Graspee_Leemoor (302316) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227313)

"Cancer research? I've yet to see a viable distributed project for cancer research. By that, I mean an organized effort with real data, a complete and concise goal, and a clean method for reaching that goal. "

http://members.ud.com/home.htm

This is real research, worked on by United Devices, helped by the University of Oxford, Intel and the National Foundation for Cancer Research.

It meets all your criteria- this is from their site:

"The research centers on proteins that have been determined to be a possible target for cancer therapy. Through a process called "virtual screening", special analysis software will identify molecules that interact with these proteins, and will determine which of the molecular candidates has a high likelihood of being developed into a drug. The process is similar to finding the right key to open a special lock--by looking at millions upon millions of molecular keys."

graspee

Re:Dnet, is it useful ? (4, Informative)

BovineOne (119507) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227416)

Because distributed.net is a purely volunteer project, many of its staff also have their paid day-time jobs working for United Devices (who are responsible for the THINK Cancer project). That includes myself [distributed.net] , Nugget [distributed.net] , Decibel [distributed.net] , Moose [distributed.net] , Moonwick [distributed.net]

Re:Dnet, is it useful ? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227420)

The poster is asking a question not flaming. Moderators!!!

Non-page-widening post!! (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227133)

I .like .normal .sized .pages.

Re:Non-page-widening post!! (-1, Offtopic)

Big Dogs Cock (539391) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227189)

I am sorry but I hold copyright on all non page-widening posts [slashdot.org] . You will be hearing from my lawyers.

I am also notifying anyone who is even thinking of making a post which in no way affects the width of the page that I fully intend to protect my intellectual property rights using any measures at my disposal. I am not without means.

Site is copyright ? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227135)

WTF is with that, they want people to help by donating CPU cycles but wont even share their website.... thats double standards.

Copy + Paste (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227137)

we need your help!

URGENT: We have recently learned that our long-standing arrangement with Texas.Net (formerly Insync) would end at noon, Friday, March 22. Through an agreement with Insync, we were hosted at no charge for many years. Though we have tried to make other arrangements with them or to continue our current service until we can make other arrangements, in the end we had no choice but to move.

Several of the Austin cows made a road trip Friday morning to retrieve our equipment from their colocation facility.

We have no reason to complain about Texas.Net or their current decision. As a business, they chose to donate to us for a long time, and have now decided that they must stop. In dbaker's words in a letter to Texas.Net: "Our experience with Insync has been excellent; I've never been happier with an Internet provider. I've recommended them (and indirectly, Texas.Net) to everyone and even this [situation] won't change that."

Though United Devices has kindly offered to colocate our primary servers for a short time at no expense, we find ourselves in the market for a new ISP. If any of our participants work for a major ISP in Texas (preferably within a few hours of Austin, but we're not picky), and would be willing to donate colocation space and connectivity, we would eagerly like to speak with you. Our typical bandwidth usage is 3Mb/s, and reliable uptime is of course essential.

Please e-mail dbaker@distributed.net if you think you may be able to help us in this area.

Practical? (1)

olman (127310) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227138)

Distributed net?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the outfit which is concerned with breaking low-grade crypto? How's that going to improve my daily life? I'd much sooner donate my CPU cycles to the evil international pharmaceutic corps which does benefit cancer study. If you get a rash from commercial ventures, there's the folding@home. It's more like basic research, so it won't produce any miracle cures, but it might eventually lead to research that could.

But breaking crypto? Why?

Re:Practical? (1)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227177)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the outfit which is concerned with breaking low-grade crypto?

If you consider 56/64/128-bit RC5 low-grade, yes.

How's that going to improve my daily life?

I have no idea what your daily life is like, but if it involves encrypting things you'd prefer stayed private, it should eventually help you in that aspect. Not to mention your boost of confidence as you follow your daily stats and see yourself advancing past others every day.

But breaking crypto? Why?

Because if a few thousand unspecialized computers can brute force the best encryption allowed by law with minimal optimization and research, then we have some good reasons to push for the law to be changed. Personally, I don't like the idea of the best encryption available to me being useful for all of 3 seconds while it's being broken. I don't usually have anything worth decrypting, but I like to think that when I do, it'll be worth my time to encrypt it.

Re:Practical? (2)

MisterBlister (539957) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227209)

Because if a few thousand unspecialized computers can brute force the best encryption allowed by law with minimal optimization and research, then we have some good reasons to push for the law to be changed.

There's absolutely no evidence to suggest that the government will ever change crypto laws based on what happens at distributed.net.

Its not like those in government who are responsible for consulting in these matters (NSA, etc) aren't aware of the issues at play here with current export-level encryption -- if you think that they are somehow unaware of these issues and dnet is required to bring them to light, please pass the crack pipe.

Re:Practical? (1)

TheToon (210229) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227349)

I agree with you. It is a dated paragraf that distributed.net should have removed. It was a valid argument back in the days when 42-bit keys was the maximum allowed for exported systems.

And 42 bits are clearly too veak. Today when 128-bits ar common and allowed to be used by almost the entire world, it's not an issue anymore.

Re:Practical? (2)

cperciva (102828) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227289)

Because if a few thousand unspecialized computers can brute force the best encryption allowed by law with minimal optimization and research, then we have some good reasons to push for the law to be changed.

That might have been true when d.net was working on DES, but things have changed.

I think a more accurate wording would be

Because if a over ten thousand computers, working for three years, can't brute force 64-bit encryption, when 256-bit encryption is readily available [rijndael.com] then we have very little reason to push for the law to be changed.

distributed.net (1)

TheToon (210229) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227143)

I have always found distributed.net to be a relative structured organization. Their software with personal proxies made joining much easier than the Seti project, esp for people behind corporate firewalls. Small unobtrusive clients (esp for the des/rc5 projects) for a LOT of platforms.

It would be a shame to see them disappear. They've had/has a lot of cumulative computing power, and it ought to be put to real use.

Ah, the days of installing the res/rc5-42 clients on lots of 386 and 486 machines and actually having them do some real computing....

GOOGLE! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227155)

Google is currently researching distributed networking through their google bar - couldn't they cooperate on this with distributed.net?

Optimization of Network Usage (1)

Jouster (144775) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227162)

I find this an excercise in futility; if the protocols used to transmit the data are not available to /.ers, we cannot suggest a scheme that would be meaningful. If the blocks are indexed, and all that's returned is an "index <X> complete" message, then a system of proxies sending message like "indexes 1217-1250 completed by my subnodes" to the main server once every hour makes sense. If, on the other hand, the bulk of the data is used to verify that processing actually occured, and that it occured with the official client (which I suspect is the case), we would need to know details of the data being passed back and forth in order to help.

I know that I, for one, have boxen and bandwidth to pull off 3 Mb/s of CPU-intensive network traffic 24/7, but I'm not about to devote my precious resources to something that I don't understand, especially when I haven't even had the chance to ascertain that a solution that utilized my donated resources was, in fact, the best one.

Jouster

Re:Optimization of Network Usage (1)

Atzanteol (99067) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227260)

After running a perproxy for over a year now, I think I can speak to this.

Each 'message' to the keyserver is more like 'ipaddres,date,username,keyrange,size of key range,client version'

They do work in ranges, and dnet has been working to make those ranges larger but not too large (larger == lower bandwidth, but more time need be spent cracking it). If it takes to long to crack a range, that range risks being recycled before a user submits it. It's a very dynamic system that they've been working on for many years now and seems to be doing well. Maybe they could tweak some more for bandwidth, but that would be a question better asked of the fine dnetc staff.

Re:Optimization of Network Usage (2)

green pizza (159161) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227366)

I, for one, have boxen and bandwidth to pull off 3 Mb/s of CPU-intensive network traffic 24/7

Sweet! What sort of connection is that? The cable modem provider in my area offers very limited "business" symmetric connections up to 5 Mbps, but they charge dearly for it. A lot cheaper than a fractional T3, though.

Re:Optimization of Network Usage (2, Informative)

BovineOne (119507) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227404)

The "keymaster" (the machine that utilizes the ~3Mbit/sec) already distributes larger regions of uncomputed work to all of the "fullservers", which are the ones that in turn distribute the actual work to clients after splitting the blocks into sizes that correspond to what is needed by clients. You can see the list of all of the fullservers at http://n0cgi.distributed.net/rc5-proxyinfo.html

All of the chatty, multi-step network communications overhead with dealing directly with the clients is done at the fullserver level, including doing a windowed-history based coalescing on result submissions.

Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (3, Interesting)

crudeboy (563293) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227163)

I think the use of spare cpu cycles is an excellent way to support science, but...
For some time the only one around was seti@home which analyzes noise from space, I think, in search for alien lifeforms, then there's distributed.net doing crypto and math stuff, (correct me if I'm wrong). And then there's people like Intel running medical research in areas like cancer and alzheimer.

I don't know about you, but to me medical research feels a somewhat more beneficial to humanity than search for aliens. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the work done by seti and distributed isn't important or shouldn't be done, just that there's other research that might be more worthwhile supporting.

That's just my opinion, but if you feel the same way, checkout this site [intel.com] .

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (4, Informative)

Sircus (16869) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227186)

You're wrong, so I'll correct you :-)

d.net was around a long time before SETI@home - I've personally been running the client since 1997. SETI@home launched on May 13, 1999 (though they were fundraising and doing development for a couple of years before that).

I'm personally strongly interested in cryptography for various reasons, so d.net gets my processor time. I seem to recall various people have concerns about how exactly the cancer project will use the eventual data it collects - i.e. whether the products produced as a result of the project will be commercially exploited - they don't want companies just using this large distributed network to make a fast buck.

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (1)

crudeboy (563293) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227195)

Heh, I stand corrected :-)

Thanks for pointing out the errors in fact, but still the cancer research appeals more to me personally even though I share the general concerns about the use of the results.

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (0, Troll)

NineNine (235196) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227200)

As far as I can figure out, the only people who would be "strongly interested in cryptography" would be cryptographers, terrorists, money launderers, and purveryors of kiddie porn. Call me nuts, but unless you fall into one of those groups, I don't see why the interest (paranoia) is warranted. I agree with the first poster. My cycles go to medicine. Whether or not it's commercial, I don't care. If my cycles help to invent a cure that I have to BUY somewhere down the line, I'll gladly buy it.

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (1)

Arimus (198136) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227219)

Execuse me.... what about large companies who use email etc to communicate between their various branches in other countries? Recently (well a year or two ago) there where a number of articles about the French spying on British and US companies, The British spying on US and French etc... and the gov't agencies concerend passed some details on to rival companies.

As for me... well I like the idea of only my intended receipient reading my emails - the gov't wants the keys they can have them but joe bloggs sitting down stream of my mail packet... can sod off.

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (5, Interesting)

Sircus (16869) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227223)

I sell a commercial SSH client and dabble in cryptography as a hobby - so I guess I fall in to the first category. There are plenty of reasons to be interested in cryptography aside from the Ashcroft/FBI-mandated ones, though. My issue with the cancer stuff is that if these companies are going to make billions off some cure (and if they come up with a cure, they sure are), I'm of the opinion that *they* should be the ones putting the billions into the research, not costing my cycles/power. I wouldn't give my facilities away to any other commercial venture for free, why should the situation change because they want to make money off cancer patients?

If the distributed cancer network weren't there, and if it's really performing a genuinely useful job for the companies, you can be sure they'd be investing the $x million required to just buy a supercomputer or three to do it for them. So the only difference I see the cancer project making is that it's saving huge pharmaceutical firms a few million dollars. The world's cryptographers, most of whom are academics (ignoring the NSA-employed ones for a minute) don't have the millions of dollars to throw around if d.net wasn't there - neither do the mathematicians interested in the results of d.net's other project, Optimal Goulomb Rulers. As a result, I see d.net as making more of a difference than the cancer stuff.

All that said, those are my reasons for running d.net - you've got your own reasons, and it's your own choice.

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (1)

Arimus (198136) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227236)

And what I tried to add to my original reply but failed as I'd clicked post a second before I thought of it...
Amnesty international amongst others make use of strong cryptography to be able to work in some of the less liberal countries - without strong crypto they'd be fubar'd.

Your reaction is typical of the brainwashing the various supposedly open gov'ts have purveyed over the last few years...

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (2)

DataSquid (33187) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227204)

I always figured dnet was on the way to UD anyway. This [ud.com] seemed to imply that, but I guess it was just people they took, noth the project. I guess there's no money in cracking crypto ;) The idea of distributed computing has been proven, and I think the original goal of allowing stronger crypto standards in the US has been achieved as well(?), so now it's on to more useflul tasks.

I still like seing my clients from my first job 4 years ago still submitting packets, gives me a nice feeling ;) Wish I never used my real email address though.

I'm sure the aliens will cure all our diseases.... (2)

Sarcasmooo! (267601) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227270)

...by VAPORIZING us!! YEEAAARRGGHH!!!

Re:Aliens, crypto or cancer - what's your choice? (2, Interesting)

Sarunas (34509) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227281)

Don't forget another practical distributed project. Stanford's protein folding project: folding@home [stanford.edu]

Can you imagine..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227171)

A beowulf cluster of Distributed.net?

that's a lot of bandwidth (4, Interesting)

Trepidity (597) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227205)

A continuous three Megabits per second works out to somewhere just under a Terabyte a month. Not going to be cheap.

Re:that's a lot of bandwidth (1)

HTD (568757) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227254)

Um just under a Terabyte, are u sure? When i calculated it assuming they meant 3Mbit/sec (and not megabyte, who knows, they used an abbreviation and are americans...) taking 30 as the average average of days in a month ;) makes 972000000000 bytes a month (says windows calculator) this divided by 1024*1024*1024*1024 gives me approx 0.75186 Terabyte. which is not just under a terabyte i'd say. it's nevertheless a lot - too much for almost any company in europe i think. out of curiosity - how were they able to afford this until now? What's traffic price in the states, or asked different how hard is it to get a green card these days ;)?

Re:that's a lot of bandwidth (1)

macjerry (535984) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227409)

A continuous three Megabits per second works out to somewhere just under a Terabyte a month. Not going to be cheap.

It's going to run about $600/month plus server costs. Bandwidth prices have been dropping rapidly over the past year.

Solution: make money. (0)

jukal (523582) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227258)

How much does reliable 3Mb/s really cost? Their project is already so popular, that it should not be a problem to find ways to make money with it.

When we run the Cyberian RC5-56 [cyberian.org] challenge we got all kinds of offers from all kinds of companies willing to ship us something, a monster Digital machine for example. And our popularity was minimal compared to them - we had like 1 percent of the amount of clients that they run now.

Why is it a problem in this case? I think that the help that they really need is the services of 1 (one) marketing oriented individual (that's not me) :)

2 Mbps DSL (2)

green pizza (159161) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227363)

I get about 2.0 Mbps from my "2.2 Mbps" SDSL connection. If two other folks such as me were to pitch in, I think we could handle it. Not sure if this would classify as business use, if so I would have to hand over another $25/month to my ISP.

troll for dogmatirc - Liunx 0ns j00! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227265)



Welcome to Konqueror 2.2.1.

With Konqueror you have your filesystem at your command, browsing local or networked drives with equal ease. Thanks to the component technology used throughout KDE 2, Konqueror is also a full featured, easy to use and comfortable Web Browser, which you can use to explore the Internet.

Simply enter the Internet address (e.g. http://www.kde.org) of the web page you want and press Enter, or choose one of the entries in your Bookmarks menu. If you want to go back to the previous web page, press the button ("Back") in the toolbar. To go back to the home directory of your local filesystem press ("Home"). For more detailed documentation on Konqueror click here.

Tuning Tip: If you want the Konqueror web browser to start faster, you can turn off this information screen by clicking here. You can re-enable it by choosing the Help -> Konqueror Introduction menu option, and then pressing Window -> Save View Profile "Web Browsing".

Continue

[goatse.cx]
I like wide pages - Just like my Anus's!
.I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages . could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pa ges .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages . you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .h ave .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .tell ing .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charater s .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .hap pens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lamenes s .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .h ow .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment . I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many . people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .P AGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I . wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .d ont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .th ose .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .b ecause .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .la meness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .ha ve .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .su cks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put . some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in . there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .t his .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesn t .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the . beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .l ike .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be . as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .m uch .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are . used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .w orry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you . that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .li ne .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and . you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter . defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .p eople .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certai nly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .T his .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDE NING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all . pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .w ide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow . pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you . dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filte r .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .c haraters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .th at .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame . lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wo nder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole . comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .to o .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .b ecause .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .p ages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as . this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .t han .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .rea ding .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about . the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .do n't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .rea lly .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .t o .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .te xt .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will . read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it . doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just . the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK . I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could . be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .ar e .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you . are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have . to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling . you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .pe r .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens . and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .fil ter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .ma ny .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .c ertainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .peop le .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE . WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish . all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .y ou .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .n arrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because . you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness . filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enou gh .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .whe n .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .l ame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there . i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .wh ole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .anno y .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginni ng .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wi de .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wid e .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .co oler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used . to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry . about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that . you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .th at .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you . have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defea ter .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people . will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .ho pe .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is . just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS . BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .c ould .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pag es .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages . you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .h ave .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .tell ing .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charater s .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .hap pens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lamenes s .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .h ow .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment . I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many . people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .P AGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I . wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .d ont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .th ose .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .b ecause .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .la meness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .ha ve .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .su cks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put . some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in . there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .t his .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesn t .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the . beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .l ike .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be . as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .m uch .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are . used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .w orry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you . that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .li ne .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and . you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter . defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .p eople .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certai nly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .T his .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDE NING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all . pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .w ide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow . pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you . dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filte r .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .c haraters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .th at .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame . lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wo nder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole . comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .to o .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .b ecause .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .p ages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as . this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .t han .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .rea ding .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about . the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .do n't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .rea lly .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .t o .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .te xt .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will . read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it . doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just . the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK . I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could . be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .ar e .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you . are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have . to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling . you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .pe r .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens . and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .fil ter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .ma ny .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .c ertainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .peop le .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE . WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish . all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .y ou .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .n arrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because . you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness . filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enou gh .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .whe n .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .l ame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there . i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .wh ole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .anno y .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginni ng .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wi de .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wid e .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .co oler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used . to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry . about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that . you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .th at .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you . have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defea ter .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people . will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .ho pe .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is . just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS . BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .c ould .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pag es .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages . you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .h ave .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .tell ing .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charater s .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .hap pens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lamenes s .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .h ow .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment . I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many . people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .P AGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I . wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .d ont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .th ose .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .b ecause .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .la meness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .ha ve .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .su cks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put . some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in . there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .t his .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesn t .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the . beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .l ike .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be . as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .m uch .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are . used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .w orry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you . that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .li ne .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and . you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter . defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .p eople .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certai nly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .T his .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDE NING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all . pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .w ide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow . pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you . dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filte r .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .c haraters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .th at .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame . lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wo nder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole . comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .to o .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .b ecause .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .p ages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as . this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .t han .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .rea ding .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about . the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .do n't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .rea lly .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .t o .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .te xt .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will . read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it . doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just . the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK . I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could . be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .ar e .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you . are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have . to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling . you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .pe r .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens . and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .fil ter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .ma ny .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .c ertainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .peop le .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE . WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish . all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .y ou .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .n arrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because . you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness . filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enou gh .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .whe n .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .l ame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there . i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .wh ole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .anno y .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginni ng .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wi de .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wid e .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .co oler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used . to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry . about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that . you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .th at .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you . have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defea ter .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people . will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .ho pe .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is . just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS . BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .c ould .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pag es .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages . you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .h ave .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .tell ing .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charater s .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .hap pens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lamenes s .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .h ow .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment . I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many . people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .P AGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I . wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .d ont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .th ose .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .b ecause .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .la meness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .ha ve .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .su cks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put . some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in . there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .t his .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesn t .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the . beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .l ike .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be . as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .m uch .cooler .than .those .narrow .page
s .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont . have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .tel ling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charate rs .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .ha ppens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lamene ss .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder . how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .commen t .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .man y .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because . PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I . wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .d ont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .th ose .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .b ecause .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .la meness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .ha ve .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .su cks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put . some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in . there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .t his .whole .comment

Re:troll for dogmatirc - Liunx 0ns j00! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227274)

OMG FAGET!!11

Page widening finally fixed in Slashcode?? (-1)

October_30th (531777) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227301)

Hey, what's happened?

Page widening doesn't work on IE anymore!

Free Cycles? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227284)

Has anyone done the math? A fully utilized CPU costs me around $0.05/hour here in California. That's $30 per CPU. Not exactly "free cycles".

Re:Free Cycles? (1)

NinjaGaidenIIIcuts (568607) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227330)

Distributed.net is somewhat seemlike but different to clustering piped via NIC's.

Few processing power is required to handle the I/O between machines, data compression and validation compared to the cpu cycles those will be spend on "internal" processing. This is true for both boxed clusters and distributed.net.

Clustering management doesn't make an impact so the cpus will do all stages of processing "in-house", but due to a different architeture distributed.net needs power to handle "160000 PII 266 MHz".

Don't laugh! (1)

NinjaGaidenIIIcuts (568607) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227299)

more than 160000 PII 266MHz computers

This is a present? For me?

Cool, but they should have presenting me with 10000 Athlons 2000+ plus 10000 Geforce4's and 10000 Game Tits XP instead. I mean, does anybody know why they use PII's 266 MHz as a reference?

Re:Don't laugh! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227325)

because it hasnt been updated in a very long time.

Reality (0, Troll)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227333)

The only reason you "submit" blocks is to get stats. If all the clients just did random blocks of keys you'd expect the key to be found equally as fast.

To top if off the finder of the key gets the *full* 10,000$ if they don't go thru d.net.

What incentive is there for d.net now?

Tom

Re:Reality (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227355)

"If all the clients just did random blocks of keys you'd expect the key to be found equally as fast."

That would lead to a lot of blocks being processed more than once before the entire keyspace was exhausted, increasing the time required.

Re:Reality (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227371)

Perhaps but how many blocks reported to dnet are valid in the first place?

A real experiment would not hand out the same block to only one person. Heck check out UD they claim to send the same block to at least five people. And I agree its a good idea. That chances that 5 people are cheats is less than the prob of only 1.

Besides, there are teams of thousands on dnet. Why don't they organize their own cache? We already know quite a bit of the keyspace is invalid.

My point is there is really no need for dnet other than stats and glory. My single computer stands about as much chance of finding the key inside dnet or outside dnet.

Tom

Re:Reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227378)

Q: How does the user know they found the winning key?
A: They don't. They only found the first 8 bits. The d.net keymaster checks for 8 good bits, then does a proper check against the full length.

HTH. HAND.

Re:Reality (0, Troll)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227385)

What the heck is this?

The algorithm probably checks for ASCII characters [e.g. the top bits of each byte is zero]. You can't decrypt just one byte in CBC mode with RC5.

What is to say I don't make my own client that does the same thing except it locally logs such hits [statistically they are 1/256] There are other things you can check too... for example the chars inside the body are likely to be in the range 32..127 which is 96 chars of the 256 possible. Statistically that is (96/256)^8 or 1/2048. There are multiple blocks which gives you 2^{-11N}.

So its just as easy to write your own client. The challenge is finding users. But like I said earlier. If you are going to run it anyways you might as well run your own client. You stand equally as much chance.

Tom

Think of all the cpu cycles wasted!!! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227343)

Just think of how many cpu cycles will be wasted if they are forced to shut down... boggles the mind!

Maybe Speakeasy to the rescue? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3227399)

If we all ask them really nicely, maybe Speakeasy [speakeasy.net] would take them on. I mean, they're one hell of an ISP and mirror RPMfind too...

Pointless project by now (2, Interesting)

Skuto (171945) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227435)

Distributed.net has gotten to be a more or less pointless project by now.

Originally, the point they wanted to make was that 64-bit RC5 was not strong enough to protect privacy.

They started, what, 4-5 years ago? About 30 000 computers running for 4 years can't break 64-bit encryption. Geez, I'd say that, if anything, the conclusion would be that 64-bits is plenty for shopping etc. unless you've got some really _big_ secrets. Certainly plenty for day-to-day mail. More or less the opposite of what they wanted to prove.

Nowadays they've added the OGR stuff to appear at least a bit more usefull, but in reality, the applications of those results are very limited.

Really, the right thing to do is not to waste power on such pointless projects.

--
GCP (Moderation suggestion: -1 Disagree)

What it costs. (1)

mbone (558574) | more than 12 years ago | (#3227463)

In most areas of the country, a single rack in a colo / exchange facility costs $ 1500 per month or less, and 3 Mbps would cost ~ $ 1200 per month. They didn't say how many racks they need, but at that bandwidth, my guess is no more than one or two.

So, they have been getting $ 3000 per month or more of free bandwidth and rack space.

IMHO, if their work is really important, they should be able to raise $ 36K per year from the crypto community.
Load More Comments

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>