Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Rather than just saying, that's a horrible idea. I am going to say, you understand the major difference in Eve and the SETI program right?

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Fangedterror

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Rather than just saying, that's a horrible idea. I am going to say, you understand the major difference in Eve and the SETI program right?

---

lol i suppose but hmmmm i still think it will work

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Rather than just saying, that's a horrible idea. I am going to say, you understand the major difference in Eve and the SETI program right?

---

Originally by: Dianabolic

---

Your tears are absolutely divine, like a fine fine wine, rolling down your cheeks until they flow down the river of LOL

Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Rather than just saying, that's a horrible idea. I am going to say, you understand the major difference in Eve and the SETI program right?

---

I think its a good idea!

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

1. Always assume the client is in the hands of your enemy. Never trust the client.

---

Quote:

---

2. Latency incurred would be too much to make a difference in fleet engagements, if not make things worse

---

Quote:

---

3. Much effort would be spent checking received data to make sure it's accurate, cutting your gains by 1/2 or more

---

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, SETI's problems and EVE's problems are similar on the surface but too different for the same solution to work.

---

Originally by: Pan Crastus

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

1. Always assume the client is in the hands of your enemy. Never trust the client.

---

Partly agree, however this is a common problem and usually solved by voting and making the information provided to the client useless for determining whether altering it will be good or bad for him.

---

Originally by: Pan Crastus

---

Quote:

---

2. Latency incurred would be too much to make a difference in fleet engagements, if not make things worse

---

Worse than 15 minutes delay? hardly.

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

Adding network latency will simply multiply that 15 minutes.

---

Originally by: Pan Crastus

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

1. Always assume the client is in the hands of your enemy. Never trust the client.

---

Partly agree, however this is a common problem and usually solved by voting and making the information provided to the client useless for determining whether altering it will be good or bad for him.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

2. Latency incurred would be too much to make a difference in fleet engagements, if not make things worse

---

Worse than 15 minutes delay? hardly.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

3. Much effort would be spent checking received data to make sure it's accurate, cutting your gains by 1/2 or more

---

Strong disagree... 1/2 of factor 100 gains is factor 50.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, SETI's problems and EVE's problems are similar on the surface but too different for the same solution to work.

---

Grid computing is an interesting concept admittedly for high-latency jobs and it's probably much easier to fix lag on the server side. I could imagine that some information would be worth sending between clients as well or only though (chat, broadcasts and hp updates for your gang etc.).

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

But I just don't see how implementing this would be easier or better than what they're working on with infiniband. Why outsource processing power to computers on the internet when you've got 200 high-speed processors sitting in the same building?

---

Originally by: Pan Crastus

---

They have 400+ now AFAIK (still not enough) and the current issue is that they don't distribute load properly. ;-) But my point was mainly that network bottlenecks could be avoided by not sending information through the server that doesn't need to be 100% reliable (or where a "best effort" is better than nothing), or send it P2P first and occasionally through the server. It would help in the case where the lagged client gets nothing from the server for 10 minutes while his peers can still send him their HP, broadcasts etc. and perhaps "effect" information (player X launched a missile).

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Fangedterror

---

Lag FREEE!!!! maybe?

---

Originally by: Fangedterror

---

Edited by: Fangedterror on 05/08/2008 15:48:01
Edited by: Fangedterror on 05/08/2008 15:45:47
Look im not a computer expert, but i was thinking perhaps if CCP used the idle computers of its players to help with its number crunching.

This would be completely voluntary of course

Players would run a program that would act as extra computing power for the CCP servers. This extra power could be used in what ever area needed. Say theres a big battle going on or jitas alittle busyer then normal today.
The PCs with the program could help cruch some of the numbers making eve a more enjoyable place.

This method is being used with SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) to help decode long lists of "space chatter"
Linkage

Now of course this probram could be turned off if you need your computer back again (i hope)

Ideas??/???

---

Originally by: Pan Crastus

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

But I just don't see how implementing this would be easier or better than what they're working on with infiniband. Why outsource processing power to computers on the internet when you've got 200 high-speed processors sitting in the same building?

---

They have 400+ now AFAIK (still not enough) and the current issue is that they don't distribute load properly. ;-) But my point was mainly that network bottlenecks could be avoided by not sending information through the server that doesn't need to be 100% reliable (or where a "best effort" is better than nothing), or send it P2P first and occasionally through the server. It would help in the case where the lagged client gets nothing from the server for 10 minutes while his peers can still send him their HP, broadcasts etc. and perhaps "effect" information (player X launched a missile).

---

Originally by: Cardice Makar

---

Edited by: Cardice Makar on 05/08/2008 17:05:51
Since no one here seems to bother explaining why it won't work, I'll attempt to shed some light on it.

The SETI project came about due to an overabundance of data, and no means to process it. To this end, they decided to harness the a wide userbase; and did so to great effect.

The reason it works so well is simple, there's an awful lot of data sat there that needs to get processed. The processing is simple, yet repetitive, so all they needed to do was build a client to fill the already existing gap of processing [they were already doing this] and build a server that could distribute chunks of the data that needed to get processed, then collect them and build a 'big picture'. This processing could take days, weeks, months or even years. The system doesn't care however, because it will simply wait it out.

The reason this won't work for EVE, is that there is very little delayed-processing that occurs in the universe; processing of combat occurs as near to instantly as possible, as all action is 'real-time' [aka, lagged, but still]. SETI has no timeline, and thus the packets that need to be processed simply remain in queue until the clients get around to them; with EVE this is not possible as the packets need to be processed 'now'.

Obviously the security problem sits ontop of that; that the clients should /never/ be considered secure, but the major problem is time.


*edit for emphasis*

---

Originally by: Savage Roar

---

There is no lag, only bullet-time.

---