Is S@H source code published?
jf_...@citenet.net
A year+ ago, S@H code was not public domain.
I find that pretty dubious and hope it is now released.
Massive parallel computing ressouces put to the disposition of S@H
project doesn't guarantee that what is TRULY computed on the volunteer
machines is SETI data...
How do we know they're not trying to crack cryptographic keys, etc?
As long as the source code remains secret, we have NO idea what this
software does, short of de-compiling it.
Comments welcome.
JFA
Michael D. Ober
from some sort of cryptographic cypher. When the US Government was trying
to force the Clipper chip and SkipJack algorithm, a challenge was put to the
FBI and they failed miserably. - Decipher a plain text file transfer given
it's transmission time, source and destination. The FBI failed because they
didn't recognize the data as Charge Coupled Device output from an optical
telescope. There must be some trust here or the whole internet will
collapse under fear and uncertainty.
--
Mike Ober
SETI Driver is at http://home.sprintmail.com/~obermd/SETIDriver
Roelof's SETISpy is at http://pages.tca.net/roelof/setispy
<jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
news:3992ea12...@news.videotron.ca...
ben...@grobbebol.xs4all.nl
> A year+ ago, S@H code was not public domain.
> I find that pretty dubious and hope it is now released.
of course, you have the source of windows and forte free agent.
> Massive parallel computing ressouces put to the disposition of S@H
> project doesn't guarantee that what is TRULY computed on the volunteer
> machines is SETI data...
nobody forces you to use it. nobody can tell you if MS, forte doesn't do
anything you don't want to. if this is a major concern, consider truly open
source software.
> How do we know they're not trying to crack cryptographic keys, etc?
how do you know your windows isn't sending information about you ?
> As long as the source code remains secret, we have NO idea what this
> software does, short of de-compiling it.
correct. matter of trust ? Id rather trust S@H more than several commercial
companies.
--
Grobbebol's Home | Don't give in to spammers. -o)
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bengel | Use your real e-mail address /\
Linux 2.2.16 SMP 466MHz / 256 MB | on Usenet. _\_v
Dirk Jr
power is going to cracking coded messages.
I've seen the light..... thanks
Dirk (Ya gotta love it!)
<jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
news:3992ea12...@news.videotron.ca...
> Hi!
>
> A year+ ago, S@H code was not public domain.
>
> I find that pretty dubious and hope it is now released.
>
> Massive parallel computing ressouces put to the disposition of S@H
> project doesn't guarantee that what is TRULY computed on the volunteer
> machines is SETI data...
>
> How do we know they're not trying to crack cryptographic keys, etc?
>
> As long as the source code remains secret, we have NO idea what this
> software does, short of de-compiling it.
>
> Comments welcome.
>
> JFA
Lawrence Kirby
>Hi!
>
>A year+ ago, S@H code was not public domain.
>
>I find that pretty dubious and hope it is now released.
>
>Massive parallel computing ressouces put to the disposition of S@H
>project doesn't guarantee that what is TRULY computed on the volunteer
>machines is SETI data...
Maybe not, but at least we can see the data and the results returned.
>How do we know they're not trying to crack cryptographic keys, etc?
>
>As long as the source code remains secret, we have NO idea what this
>software does, short of de-compiling it.
You're no better off even if they do provide source because you'd
have no proof that the distributed binary came from the exact published
source.
--
-----------------------------------------
Lawrence Kirby | fr...@genesis.demon.co.uk
Wilts, England | 7073...@compuserve.com
-----------------------------------------
jf_...@citenet.net
publish their source code yet harvest CPUs ressources worldwide.
To view the computing power statistics, visit
From http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/totals.html
Total Last 24 Hours
Users 2,233,814 2094
Results received 167633887 589513
Floating Point 3.352678e+20 1.179026e+18
Operations (13.65 TeraFLOPs/sec)
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:10:59 -1000, "Dirk Jr" <dirk...@aloha.net>
wrote:
The essence of the replies I got were detractors and ridiculization.
That is very unfortunate.
No, I cannot de-compile it. NO, I can not even analyse the source.
But some people actually can and do analyse such things. Cypherpunks
(or what is left of them) do things like that. You'd be surprized how
many people did compare the actual PGP binaries with the compiled
source code to verify that hte distributed binaries are truly a kosher
compilation of the source.
The fact that I cannot do it myself doesn't make my questionning
invalid.
As to the questions about "how do you know that microsoft isn't
snooping on ya?", well, they are probably doing it. But is that a
reason to stop verifying as much as one can do? I don't think so.
There is a difference between microsoft sniffing on us and ratting to
an hypothetical big brother and putting to work a piece of software
that will give a free lunch to somebody else. In the first case, tehy
cannot get more than you put on your machine while in the second one,
you are PAYING to help them fuck you.
All the arguments brought forward do not hold water.
As for S@H organixation, ask yourself where the money supplying the
air conditionning in their offices, the salary of their secretaries,
financing many research grants comes from... The fact that NASA cut
the budgets of the SETI project, a grandstanding political manoeuvre
it there was one,, has nothing to do with the govt having no money to
covertly finance such things, especially if it provides with a
legitimate entrance door into people's lifes AND providing CPU cycles
for free... What is important to them is not as much a matter of
money as a matter of operating discretely.
I have no idea if this is true. It is only hypothesis. But short of
having S@H providing it's source code, then having it checked by
cryptographers and comparing the binaries with the binaries from the
source, there is NO way Seti @ Home can prove it's good faith.
No character assasination will ever change that. It's THAT simple:
publish your source! Period!
Ciao
JFA
Colorado Dave
news:39938210....@news.videotron.ca...
> Total
Last 24 Hours
>
> Floating Point 3.352678e+20 1.179026e+18
> Operations (13.65
TeraFLOPs/sec)
I've always been puzzled by this...can someone explain why
1.179026+18 equals 13.65 TeraFlops?
Tera means 10^12
So we would need 13.65 E12 times E6 to even get in the
ballpark range.
I know rounding errors exist, but going from 1.17 to 13.65,
excluding the E6 factor seems extreme.
Am I missing something here?
(Nothing like asking a question and HOPING it snot stupid or
obvious).
By the way, Outlook Express spellcheck thinks TeraFLOPS
should be changed to Earflaps!
--
Colorado Dave
Odysseus
"Colorado Dave" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> <jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
> news:39938210....@news.videotron.ca...
> > Total
> Last 24 Hours
> >
> > Floating Point 3.352678e+20 1.179026e+18
> > Operations (13.65
> TeraFLOPs/sec)
>
> I've always been puzzled by this...can someone explain why
> 1.179026+18 equals 13.65 TeraFlops?
>
> Tera means 10^12
> So we would need 13.65 E12 times E6 to even get in the
> ballpark range.
> I know rounding errors exist, but going from 1.17 to 13.65,
> excluding the E6 factor seems extreme.
>
> Am I missing something here?
> (Nothing like asking a question and HOPING it snot stupid or
> obvious).
Sorry to shatter your hopes, but .... have you considered the fact that there
are 86,400 seconds in a day?
__________
--Odysseus 2.5# @ 5.0Y
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Snorre A. Selmer
"If all the personal computers on earth (260 million) were put to work on
one single PGP-encrypted message, it would still take 12 million times the
known age of the universe (and that's a LOOONG time) to decipher a single
message." -William Crowell, Deputy Director, NSA 1997
Now, in 1997, a PII-233 was WOW, so we've come a bit further in power per
PC, so I propose this small calculation:
2 million PCs (The number of S@h users) make up for 100th of the computing
power of those 260 million PCs in '97) work on ONE message that would take 6
million times (yes, the NSA would want it to sound harder than it is, so
that we would feel safer) the known age of the universe (the earth is 4
billion years old(?), so the universe is WAY older (lets say 1000 times
older))...
With numbers:
((4.000.000.000x1.000)*6.000.000)/(2.000.000/100)
or
(4e12*6e6)/200e6
Wich gives me the final answer:
120.000.000.000, or 120e9, or 120 BILLION years...
The conclution:
It will take us 120 billion years to crack ONE message that (for all we
know) is a shopping-list for the cafeteria in the russian parliament! Yeah,
let's get cracking...
(Now this math-problem has a few flaws... The age of the universe is
probably wrong... Maybe it should be a thousand times older than what I
wrote (or maybe MORE)... So you see, the error percentage here is HUGE
because of potentially incorrect numbers (ESTIMATES) and BIG round-offs and
simplifications!)
Let me know what you think!
--
Snorre A. Selmer
Helgeshaugen 25
3517 Hønefoss
NORWAY
Computer Consultant @ SRV in Oslo
E-mail: sno...@statvoks.no
Begin SETI geek-code:
100WU/1729hrs
Member of the top 12%
End SETI geek-code
<jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
news:3992ea12...@news.videotron.ca...
> Hi!
>
> A year+ ago, S@H code was not public domain.
>
> I find that pretty dubious and hope it is now released.
>
> Massive parallel computing ressouces put to the disposition of S@H
> project doesn't guarantee that what is TRULY computed on the volunteer
> machines is SETI data...
>
> How do we know they're not trying to crack cryptographic keys, etc?
>
> As long as the source code remains secret, we have NO idea what this
> software does, short of de-compiling it.
>
> Comments welcome.
>
> JFA
Carolyn
<jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
> This post is in response to my criticizing of Seti@Home who refuses to
> publish their source code yet harvest CPUs ressources worldwide.
(snip)
This subject was covered extensively about nine months ago. Why don't you
look up those posts and review them, then get back to us.
--
Carolyn 7*@ 7.7#
http://setiweb.org/clinic/
http://setiweb.org/CarolynsAlienClinic/
http://setiweb.org/ClinicUnderground/
Join the Underground discussions at:
http://setiweb.org/ClinicUnderground/disc4_toc.htm
Ian S
tax returns............
"Dirk Jr" <dirk...@aloha.net> wrote in message
news:h%Ck5.263$NX2....@news.aloha.net...
Colorado Dave
I did not pick up on the fact that the top number was for 24
hours
and the bottom number was for 1 second.
--
Colorado Dave
"Odysseus" <odysseu...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8n07j8$ik$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article
<p3Mk5.73610$6y5.48...@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com>,
> "Colorado Dave" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> > <jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
Eric Heien
The actual analysis code is in fact already openly available, however,
we still choose not to release the rest of the code for security
reasons. Yes, I know security through obscurity isn't the best policy,
but it would be *much* easier for people to fake signals and pump up
their stats if they knew the exact inner workings of the client, which
would create that much more of a hassle for us.
In the old versions, we used the four1 procedure for FFTs from Numerical
Recipes in C. You can see the exact code and scientific and
mathematical derivations for it in Numerical Recipes in C. It's
available at www.nr.com, or you can just jump directly to
http://www.ulib.org/webRoot/Books/Numerical_Recipes/bookcpdf/c12-2.pdf
for the specific section.
The new FFT used in the beta versions (and soon version 3.0) is the
Ooura FFT library. You can get the code and benchmarks at http://momonga.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~ooura/fft.html.
The new pulse finding code is called the Fast Folding Algorithm (FFA).
I'm sure there are several sources and papers for it on the Internet,
but the first I saw was
http://www.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de/staff/peter/ffades.en.html. This
particular analysis routine was written by us, but was based on code
that is publicly available (for example, from the above link).
The triplet code is based on ideas developed by some NASA scientists (I
don't know their names offhand). The code was actually entirely written
here rather than based on other code, but I'm sure there are papers and
sample code available somewhere out there for it.
Hope this answers some of the questions everyone out there has had.
-Eric Heien
ehe...@setiathome.berkeley.edu
Lawrence Kirby
ehe...@setiathome.berkeley.edu "Eric Heien" writes:
>The actual analysis code is in fact already openly available, however,
...
One thing I haven't seen an explanation of or code for is "Baseline smoothing"
Can you explain what happens in that?
Odysseus
fr...@genesis.demon.co.uk wrote:
> In article <39944AB0...@setiathome.berkeley.edu>
> ehe...@setiathome.berkeley.edu "Eric Heien" writes:
>
> >The actual analysis code is in fact already openly available, however,
>
> ...
>
> One thing I haven't seen an explanation of or code for is "Baseline smoothing"
> Can you explain what happens in that?
>
There is a brief non-technical description at
<http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/screensaver/data_analysis.html>.
An aside -- I have noticed that the Mac client always does this every time it
is launched, or whenever the screen-saver kicks in. However the Windows
client only does it the first time the client runs after startup; when
resuming after being interrupted or having its window minimized it seems to
carry on the chirping/FFTing/curve-fitting exactly where it left off.
jf_...@citenet.net
<sno...@statvoks.no> wrote:
>You're just paranoid...
>
>"If all the personal computers on earth (260 million) were put to work on
>one single PGP-encrypted message, it would still take 12 million times the
>known age of the universe (and that's a LOOONG time) to decipher a single
>message." -William Crowell, Deputy Director, NSA 1997
>
>Now, in 1997, a PII-233 was WOW, so we've come a bit further in power per
>PC, so I propose this small calculation:
That's beyond the point. I've been lurking on the Cypherpunks since
'95 and I've read all of the mandatory crypto primers...
Please don't reply as if I didn't already think about that...
JFA
jf_...@citenet.net
security standpoint.
Many people kinda read me wrong. I would LOVE to contribute to such
project. I even consider putting up my own SetiLeague station in my
(not yet) own backyard as soon as it becomes mine...
May I suggest a solution: send your source code to Bruce Schneier at
Counterpane <schn...@counterpane.com> and ask him if he would be
willing to review the software, then sign the binaries with his PGP
key. I have no idea if he will accept it, but he might just do it for
the heck of it.
That might be a solution.
Regards
jfa
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 11:49:21 -0700, Eric Heien
<ehe...@setiathome.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>The actual analysis code is in fact already openly available, however,
Ian S
Seeing as how posts suggesting that SETI@Home is some sort of conspiracy pop
up on a regular basis, maybe you should run a discussion or hey, even a
competition to find the best "REAL" purpose of S@H at the Clinic. I have
already suggested Bill Gates' tax returns, but there must be better ones
than that
;O)
Ian
"Carolyn" <ceh...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:eNSk5.23342$IX6.1...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
Carolyn
Ian S <ia...@REMOVETHISgofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message
> Carolyn
> Seeing as how posts suggesting that SETI@Home is some sort of conspiracy
pop
> up on a regular basis, maybe you should run a discussion or hey, even a
> competition to find the best "REAL" purpose of S@H at the Clinic. I have
> already suggested Bill Gates' tax returns, but there must be better ones
> than that
>
> ;O)
The Discussion group at the Clinic Underground is the place to post all the
latest conspiracy theories. Dr Vendello reads the comments regularly and
sometimes intitiates an Underground investigation based on the postings.
Carolyn's Clinic takes the position that anyone who feels there is an
alterior motive behind the S@H program, needs to visit the Clinic for an
extended stay. :o)
jf_...@citenet.net
wrote:
>The Discussion group at the Clinic Underground is the place to post all the
>latest conspiracy theories. Dr Vendello reads the comments regularly and
>sometimes intitiates an Underground investigation based on the postings.
>Carolyn's Clinic takes the position that anyone who feels there is an
>alterior motive behind the S@H program, needs to visit the Clinic for an
>extended stay. :o)
That's BS. Why speculate and play samrt ass? The only thing that
should be done is to have the source reviewed by competent
cryptanalysts and having them digitally sign the binaries. Period.
THAT SIMPLE!
jfa
Carolyn
<jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
My reply (which you included in your post) was to Ian's post (which you did
not include in your post).
The above mentioned exchange was generated by your initial posting which
included the following:
"Massive parallel computing resources put to the disposition of S@H
project doesn't guarantee that what is TRULY computed on the volunteer
machines is SETI data...
How do we know they're not trying to crack cryptographic keys, etc?
As long as the source code remains secret, we have NO idea what this
software does, short of de-compiling it."
In my opinion, no one posted anything that warranted your somewhat hostile
sounding reply. Your initial post seems to say that you have doubts about
the validity of the S@H program or have doubts as to whether the program is
looking for ET or secretly looking for something else. This certainly
sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. One has to wonder what would lead a
person to come up with such an idea.
Just because you don't know exactly _how_ something works doesn't mean that
it is potentially doing something _other_ than what it is supposed to do.
I'd be willing to bet that you have more than one appliance in your house
right now that has parts that you are unfamiliar with or that works but you
don't know exactly how.
Applying same thought process that you did to the S@H program, have you
ever taken apart your television to see what is inside that? If not, how do
you know that it isn't equipped with a device to watch you?
If you have doubts or problems concerning running the program, then don't
run it. Just like the TV, you can always turn it off.
SkzDaLimit
'right now', SETI@Home chooses not to release the source? I suppose you are
one of those assholes who trys to hack into the pentagon or sit on their
doorstep trying to get them to release shit on the stealth bomber, just so
you can find out what makes it tick.....
What is it you ultimately want to learn? That we are not decoding "ancient
chinese secrets" and we are really looking for some intelligent life in the
universe trying to contact us? Better not look in the mirror my friend, as
you will not find anything intelligent there......
Go crawl back in your little darkroom with your newspaper clippings about
the "continuing JFK assasination theorys", and "Elvis is alive and lives on
an island" articles you have gotten from the Weekly World News.
I think the best word to describe you can be found in your own
ranting........crypt(anal)ysts.
--
Michael Alan Johnson (ICQ 25404699)
SkzDaLimit.com Seti Search Group and Resource Center
"3.4*@7.4#"
Doing our part to find SETI.....One WU at a time!
<jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
news:39956684...@news.videotron.ca...
Thomas Roy Garner
>As for S@H organixation, ask yourself where the money supplying the
>air conditionning in their offices, the salary of their secretaries,
>financing many research grants comes from... The fact that NASA cut
>the budgets of the SETI project, a grandstanding political manoeuvre
>it there was one,, has nothing to do with the govt having no money to
>covertly finance such things, especially if it provides with a
>legitimate entrance door into people's lifes AND providing CPU cycles
>for free... What is important to them is not as much a matter of
>money as a matter of operating discretely.
>
Conspiracy theories, I LOVE IT. Myself, I don't care if they publish
the Source Code, why? B/c I am not intelligent enough to read it,
thats way.
Sorry.
----
ICQ 4580576
Thomas Roy Garner
probably out of whack.
NOTE1: I've changed the subject, b/c it doesn't entirely relate to
the original thread ... please forgive...
Is it possible to tie together "unused" satellite dishes and use their
combined "strength" so search for signals?
I just saw last night on The Learning Channel (TLC), a really cool
show about SETI, DRAKE Formula and other things.
One thing that caught me by surprise was the use of personal satelitte
dishes to search for signals. With far more powerful dishes, I'd
think that their size and power would far outstretch a home satelitte
dish, then again, maybe I'm wrong, I honestly don't know.
SOOOOO, my quetsion is, can it be possible to write software that can
use average everyday person's dish, scan the sky, upload the scanned
section (new work units) to a central place (SETI@HOME) and then
re-distribute the Work Units to the populous at large?
----
ICQ 4580576
Kim Wilson
years
--
Regards
Kim Wilson
rkwi...@voyager.co.nz
"Snorre A. Selmer" <sno...@statvoks.no> wrote in message
news:39933882$1...@rnsv-1.ringnett.no...
> You're just paranoid...
>
> "If all the personal computers on earth (260 million) were put to work on
> one single PGP-encrypted message, it would still take 12 million times the
> known age of the universe (and that's a LOOONG time) to decipher a single
> message." -William Crowell, Deputy Director, NSA 1997
>
> Now, in 1997, a PII-233 was WOW, so we've come a bit further in power per
> PC, so I propose this small calculation:
>
> <jf_...@citenet.net> wrote in message
> news:3992ea12...@news.videotron.ca...
> > Hi!
> >
> > A year+ ago, S@H code was not public domain.
> >
> > I find that pretty dubious and hope it is now released.
> >
> > Massive parallel computing ressouces put to the disposition of S@H
> > project doesn't guarantee that what is TRULY computed on the volunteer
> > machines is SETI data...
> >
> > How do we know they're not trying to crack cryptographic keys, etc?
> >
> > As long as the source code remains secret, we have NO idea what this
> > software does, short of de-compiling it.
> >
> > Comments welcome.
> >
> > JFA
>
>
David Woolley
Thomas Roy Garner <trga...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> NOTE1: I've changed the subject, b/c it doesn't entirely relate to
> the original thread ... please forgive...
You've also failed to correlate the subject or contents with the original
thread!
> Is it possible to tie together "unused" satellite dishes and use their
> combined "strength" so search for signals?
Yes, but doing it effectively is difficult, because you have to ensure
that the signals from the different dishes are synchronised to an
accuracy of a few pico-seconds. You can actually carefully distort the
delays so as to form multiple beams in the signal processing. This
is probably what the one hectare telescope that just got 7 figure funding
will do.
> One thing that caught me by surprise was the use of personal satelitte
> dishes to search for signals. With far more powerful dishes, I'd
For the pro-arguments, see <http://www.setileague.org/>.
> think that their size and power would far outstretch a home satelitte
> dish, then again, maybe I'm wrong, I honestly don't know.
The advantages are that it is easier to get people to fund their
own dish than to fund time on a professional one, and that you cover
more solid angle per unit time, even though the range is a lot less.
There is enough sensitivity in such systems to reach to quite respectable
distances, provided the sender is using something like the planetary radar
transmitter at Arecibo.
> SOOOOO, my quetsion is, can it be possible to write software that can
> use average everyday person's dish, scan the sky, upload the scanned
> section (new work units) to a central place (SETI@HOME) and then
> re-distribute the Work Units to the populous at large?
Phasing the array would require hardware as well as software. A single
dish could be processed like this, but gaussian times could be so long that
you could need to apply second order corrections to the de-chirping.
Robert Cesar
processing satellite television data, RFI, etc.
--
___________
Robert Cesar
110WU/1450hrs
Visit us at http://www.slo-tech.com
"Thomas Roy Garner" <trga...@hushmail.com> wrote in message
news:ffubpss54t9mrqr5p...@4ax.com...
> NOTE: I'm an idiot when it comes to Satellite Dishes, so my theory is
> probably out of whack.
>
> NOTE1: I've changed the subject, b/c it doesn't entirely relate to
> the original thread ... please forgive...
>
> Is it possible to tie together "unused" satellite dishes and use their
> combined "strength" so search for signals?
>
> I just saw last night on The Learning Channel (TLC), a really cool
> show about SETI, DRAKE Formula and other things.
>
> One thing that caught me by surprise was the use of personal satelitte
> dishes to search for signals. With far more powerful dishes, I'd
> think that their size and power would far outstretch a home satelitte
> dish, then again, maybe I'm wrong, I honestly don't know.
>
> SOOOOO, my quetsion is, can it be possible to write software that can
> use average everyday person's dish, scan the sky, upload the scanned
> section (new work units) to a central place (SETI@HOME) and then
> re-distribute the Work Units to the populous at large?
>
>
>
> ----
> ICQ 4580576
Mark Baker
>I have
>already suggested Bill Gates' tax returns, but there must be better ones
>than that
>
and those running Linux/Unix rather than Windows on their desktops to
help with the work.
--
Mark Baker - 9.5*@ 2.67 yrs per arecibo ad sapientis extra terrestrialis
Web Pages: http://www.lange.demon.co.uk/Index.html
Peter Punk
the following text:
>>I have already suggested Bill Gates' tax returns, but there must be better
>>ones than that
>Proof positive that Bill Gates has a sense of humour: getting Mac users
>and those running Linux/Unix rather than Windows on their desktops to
>help with the work.
You underestimate uncle Bill, he know a good system when he sees one :-))
--
Peter Punk
\ /
---\\\\---
/ \
Visit my MIDI-site at http://members.xoom.com/miditation/index.html
(I have added several new links)
What does "it" mean in the sentence "What time is it?"?
Lawrence Kirby
odysseu...@my-deja.com "Odysseus" writes:
>In article <966032...@genesis.demon.co.uk>,
> fr...@genesis.demon.co.uk wrote:
>> In article <39944AB0...@setiathome.berkeley.edu>
>> ehe...@setiathome.berkeley.edu "Eric Heien" writes:
>>
>> >The actual analysis code is in fact already openly available, however,
>>
>> ...
>>
>> One thing I haven't seen an explanation of or code for is "Baseline smoothing">> Can you explain what happens in that?
>>
>
>There is a brief non-technical description at
><http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/screensaver/data_analysis.html>.
Yes, however I'm looking for a more technical description i.e. the operations
it actually performs.
>
>An aside -- I have noticed that the Mac client always does this every time it
>is launched, or whenever the screen-saver kicks in. However the Windows
>client only does it the first time the client runs after startup; when
>resuming after being interrupted or having its window minimized it seems to
>carry on the chirping/FFTing/curve-fitting exactly where it left off.
I did see this metioned on the S@H web site somewhere.
Ian Gunn
up a receiver and creating seperate radio telescopes.. There is a link in
related web sites on SETI homepage.
SUQKRT
In article <mqdjps49v5f4d2mas...@4ax.com>,
pp...@damnthatspam.chello.nl (Peter Punk) wrote:
>
>
>>>I have already suggested Bill Gates' tax returns, but there must be better
>
>>>ones than that
>>Proof positive that Bill Gates has a sense of humour: getting Mac users
>>and those running Linux/Unix rather than Windows on their desktops to
>>help with the work.
>
>You underestimate uncle Bill, he know a good system when he sees one :-))
>--
yup, we Mac owners are conspiring to take over the world ;o>
suz #5A
macmoosette
140 +
=^..^= =^..^= =^..^= =^..^=
Do not meddle in the affairs of cats,
for they are subtle and will piss
on your computer.
Peter Punk
following text:
>>>>I have already suggested Bill Gates' tax returns, but there must be better
>>>>ones than that
>>>Proof positive that Bill Gates has a sense of humour: getting Mac users
>>>and those running Linux/Unix rather than Windows on their desktops to
>>>help with the work.
>>You underestimate uncle Bill, he know a good system when he sees one :-))
>yup, we Mac owners are conspiring to take over the world ;o>
Didn't i know it? You Mackies are taking your sweet time though :-)))
--
Peter Punk
\ /
---\\\\---
/ \
Visit my MIDI-site at http://members.xoom.com/miditation/index.html
(I have added several new links)
The light at the end of the tunnel is often the headlight of an approaching train.