# And I have no idea what it is doing. # You probably should have gotten the source code along with it then. # math # that fucks up hard-drives and operating systems? # It seems to like to access the hard drive for two solid minutes for no # apparent reason while it is connected to your server and, according to # the message, "sleeping." A lot of things can be done in two minutes of # access to a hard drive. # As you can see in the source code, the rc5-56-client software does not access the disk in any way, shape or form. Unless your libc.so does something in sleep(2V) other than what normal distributions do, the program is really sleeping. # "It's uh, doing some math or something..." isn't a very good basis # for people to run the software on a few million bucks worth of hardware. Plain and simple, don't run it. If you do not feel comfortable running software, then don't run it. I sure as hell wouldn't, and I don't expect you to. # I don't think it is a waste of bandwith to question whether people # should feel comfortable downloading and running applications which # provide neither source code nor documentation that can be used to # judge the competence and/or integrity of those producing it. Again, this is all irrelevant since source code has, and will continue to be, available. # Yet you still call me a fucking retard for wanting to be able # to verify that your software isn't going to turn my machine into # a toaster? I think you misinterepreted what I said. You should spend less time over-analyzing this, and more time looking over the source code for the client. # This doesn't matter for shit if you have nothing in place to provide # info in this regard for those participating in your group effort. Again, this is irrelevalnt. I have nothing but support from all the major groups of people participating in this. The only person who seems so hostile towards this attempt, hasn't even bothered to even research what he is talking about. # Since my efforts have led to me finding out that I have a "bum client", # the bandwidth is serving my purpose very well. No, it works fine. The calculation on time is simply off as someone didn't compensate for a specific architecture properly. # Does this include us 'retards' who are 'wasting bandwidth'? This is so off the wall, I'm contemplating printing it out and framing it. # I am sure that you all are taking great pains to develop the best # possible software for this endeavor, but unless you take care of the # 'information' end of the spectrum, you will lose the participation of # those people who require a certain level of assurance that your # softare meets a decent standard of competence, and that someone is # actually in charge and paying attention. Like I said before. Nobody is forcing you to do anything, as a matter of fact, I dont even recall asking you. Naturally you, as well as everyone else, is more than welcome to participate in our efforts, and parts of this effort which may be lacking certain lusters will certainly be improved. We are doing this in our spare time; I personally do not care to benefit from this in anyway whatsoever. These issues are biased based on having obviously not spent enough time researching what you are talking about. Source code has been available, you never bothered to even ask. I am not going to spend anymore time in apissing contest here. We have around 4000 hosts running this, along with serious participation from major vendors. Again, if you are at all concerned about this, then don't participate. That is the bottom line. earle.