FWIW, I'm not really in to BOINC for the credits; though they do provide some form of representation of the contribution I have made over the years, I would rather see my resources do something good rather than improve an arbitrary number. While the user certainly has an option to crunch whatever project they want, I do think there should be some semi-rigid standard by which credit is issued, if for nothing other than comparison purposes of your contribution between projects. If they are too skewed, having a credit system at all is pretty useless.

I don't think that excluding Bitcoin Utopia just because it's not a science project is valid grounds; we have projects like BURP (CGI rendering), Chess960 and others that fall well outside the "science" boundaries that have been accepted for years. The specialized hardware issue has also been addressed, though those other projects which require it (Radioactive, QCN, etc) don't give out as much credit. Although I'm not terribly familiar with the design of ASIC or FPGA devices, could someone not build or program one to be an accelerated computing device for some other BOINC project app?

As far as the Bitcoin element, I knew it was just a matter of time before mining made its way to BOINC, though the fact that it's a charitable project (and not just for pool and user profit) is a pretty cool thing. I would not object to a for-profit BOINC pool on principle, though I would not feel comfortable with those stats being incorporated since you're not really "giving" anything. A simple solution to that would be a benevolent pool administrator not giving points, or at the very least not exporting stats. I have personally added the project to support the MilkyWay campaign, but I don't have any of the specialized hardware--just a couple of GPUs and CPUs.

Just a side note, the BOINC software has the capability of tracking cross-project stats, just look at the "Projects in which you are participating" under your account page at any BOINC project. I can't say why there was never any official stats site, maybe they just didn't want to take on the costs and maintenance overhead, or maybe there were already enough external sites popping up.

Perhaps a compromise would be the ability within to exclude certain projects from the stats you're looking at within BOINCstats, or other stats sites. That way, you could compare your stats to other people without projects that you think are too fast & loose with credit.

Some people want to see "BOINC Combined", some people do not want to see "BOINC Combined".

If YOU do not want to watch the Combined, then do not open these statistics!
I do not see any reason to block it for EVERYONE. "BOINC Combined" is not forbidden as child pornography or zoophilia.
Live and let live.

That's why I propose a compromise, where you could check or uncheck projects to be included in the combined stats display. Those preferences could easily be done on an account level. That way, if Bitcoin Utopia or some other project was somehow offensive to you, you could exclude it for your comparisons.

At first sorry for creating another thread for this.

As you can see at this screenshot:
(If you can't see the screenshot correctly clic here)

BOINC combined have a total credit of 3263388055907 credits and Bitcoin Utopia have 1025168504963 credits, isn't that weird? That's like 1/3 rigt? Is the counter buged to me only or can you see the same?

The reason Bitcoin Utopia has so many credit is because it allows people to use special devices called ASICs that specialize in doing the calculations needed to mine for bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies that use a similar hash. The Asics are capable of doing this calculation hundreds or thousands of times faster than the fastest GPUs can do them. Unfortunately, these ASICs can only do this one type of calculation and nothing else.
This has already come to the attention of one of the original developers of BOINC. One of the possible solutions proposed is to divide credits given by certain categories. One category would be credits given for using a GPU/CPU. Another category would be credits given for hard disk space usage. Still another would be for internet time used. The last category would be "special" credits given for using other equipment, such as bitcoin mining ASICs.

I have noticed that they assign a flat rate for returned GPU workunits, rather than based on the computing time/difficulty/quorum. I know FPGAs and ASICs burn through the tasks pretty quick, but that scoring system probably doesn't help.

About buying external devices there are fair projects and unfair projects, for example:

You buy an USB external wave detector to participate on Quake Catcher Network or a radiation sensor to RAIOACTIVE@HOME, projects that give a reasonable amount of credits because this devices gather the data, but is your CPU which process the data. And that is fair because if you don't want to buy that sensor just join another project and give it the resources of your CPU.

If you buy an ASIC that process a lot of information, but this information only can be Bitcoin mining, so they are the project who have the monopoly of this devices and they get a lot of credit. That is unfair. To make it fair, we could as bones cruncher said:

Or we also can make a credit comparision, for example if ASIC's can process hundreds of thousands more than a CPU, credit given by work done by an ASIC should be hundreds of thousands less.

That is a Totally Stupid Statement ... IMO

If you want to say that then why isn't the GPU Credit given at some Projects Hundreds of Times Less since they can run the Wu's Hundred's of Times Faster than the CPU's can ???

1. The part I bolded is wrong. These projects are NCI-ones: non-computing-intensive and don't use the CPU at all, they only gather data and don't process anything. Even if you're not participating in any of these projects you should know that.
2. It got a more or less common habit that NCI-projects are giving a (very) low amount of credit. They are from my POV underpaid, because I believe, the data they gather, is more or less as important as CPU-results you return to other projects, so calling that "a reasonable amount" is far from appropriate.
Just my 2 cents here.


I think the GPU-app at Bitcoin Utopia is pretty useless, at least the NVIDIA-part, even after the update. Can't say for the ATI-app though.
As for ASICs, the WUs vary in time/length and get a fixed credit amount also. Long WUs appear probably the same as short ones. Regardless how much WUs I crunch, I get about 1,3 mio credits in average every day with a small 1,6 GHz erupter, so it balances itself somehow.

I think that is a great idea. Now we need a project that can give me WU that can run on a Commodore 64 so I can earn hundreds of billions of credits a day.

Both my GPUs are ATI, I get 1,800 credits for any completed task. The current time range is 160-3,000 seconds; that seems a rather bloated credit reward.

Yeah, thanks now i know one think more, but what really means about that is that they don't give any incentive to buy a device, if you can't afford the device, just go to another project; they just give you the credit that they want as all other projects. Bitcoin utopia is offering, undirectly, that if you buy an ASIC you will get lot of credit. That is completley unfair for crunchers that get milions of credits trough the years, now you can buy an ASIC, join bitcoin utopia and rank up as quickly as light velocity, so are you telling to me that boinc has turned into a Distributed computing network where if you dont have an ASIC and don't joined bitcoin utopia you can't be on a high position on the rank. Don't you think that this is unfair?

victor, the main developer of BOINC has confirmed that the credit amount is right, a long time ago there was a need to rethink about the creditsystem came with CPU to GPU.

For me there is only ONE question:

Do i want to support projects and how i want to do this?
I can use standard HW (CPU and GPU) and i can make a donnation to the projects if i want to support them with extra money.

OR i can spend a lot of money to buy specific HW that can only be used for a single project (= Bitcoin Utopia).

So my question to you all out there: why you buy expensive HW for Bitcoin Utopia (or bitcoin mining in gereral) and don't spend (parts of) that money for projects?
Isn't it only because it gives a lot of Cobblestones ?

I would never buy HW that can only be used for a single project to gain a crazy amount of Cobblestones.
For my understanding is is also completly wrong to add their results in boincstats. You run HW that can not be compared to standard HW and this exotic HW can not run any other work than mining bitcoins - so why add the results in here?
And don't use the argument: "it's faster than a CPU or GPU !" -Your ASIC is useless for any other scientific calculation.

20.00 USD is "expensive'? lol

Hanz, I believe that there are as many answers to your question as there are BOINC users. We are not all the same for it to be so, it would be a boring world. In my case, here is my answer to your more than one question or statement:

I support a project of my choosing the best way I can and the way it suits me according to my ability, funds and time. If I were to be a Millionare, a Billionare would beat me therefore my competitive nature would be stopped somewhere along the way, realizing that it is futile to continue for I can not be number one as far as Money is concerned, yet I would continue despite other objects like corporations using all their machines at their disposal and the IT adds his name to the list and uses those machines as his own. Why, because I hope that my efforts would help worthy causes at the same time it is Fun to do so.

Yes, I too can make a direct donation but to me that is just a cold way with no fun. Besides, it is my machines that I built myself and paid for out of my pocket that is doing the work that these projects are doing. Giving them direct cash is only helpful indirectly for it gives me pleasure that my machines are doing some useful work.

Since when was a GPU standard HW. After all, it was only created to perform tasks hundreds of times faster than CPU making it ideal for Gamers. If you do not need it for gaming than the CPU and a cheap Video card will do the job. I am no Technician and I have not got a Chrystal ball what is in the future as regards Asics. The fact is it can do a specific job like a GPU a lot faster than anything at this stage. The actual cash that is the outcome of the exercise which is directed to a worthy project. Note that I did not use the word Scientific project for I can not find any statement in the BOINC wikipedia or in any other official BOINC document that BGOINC is to be used for purely Scientific purposes. It can be used for Grid computing and in deed by companies to help them in their need for volunteers to provide a strong computer base.

To answers why I use expensive equipment, I can only say weather right or wrong is because I perceive that its use will make computations faster whatever project you wish to run. It is my choice to run amongst others BitCoin Utopia because the funds created from its use is directly benefiting worthwhile project both within BOINC like MilkyWay and outside BOINC as well. If I did not like the project than I probably would not crunch it. I am sorry but I do say that it is faster in the same way as a GPU is faster than a CPU therefore it deserves more credit. The faster the machine can come up with a result of whatever it is seeking to solve the better it is for the project that uses it.

Finaly, as regards why it should be included in Stats. As far as I am is concerned it is a BOINC project and is legally entitled to receive recognition the same way as any other BOINC Projects. We had many projects before that were questionable, let the public decide weather it is good or bad, If no users than the project will cease. The answer is in your hands and it is your choice. Some have argued that BU's cobblestones are ridiculously high, some have proved that using the same basis to award credits as any other CPU work it is reasonable. Over the years we have argued the merits of credit comparisons, created credit New etc. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. Again, it is your choice weather you wish to see those scores in stats. If you do not like it than do not look at it but don't tell the world to stop publishing it because you think it does not belong in the stats, let others make their choice

Hans, why on earth are you critical of Bitcoin Utopia, if you are regularly crunching for them yourself? Do you somehow think it's more admirable that you crunch for Bitcoin Utopia with a cpu/gpu? It's kind of like using a chisel when a jackhammer is needed..Or are you really someone else and spoofing Hans?

Just to clarify, the boinc points system is now completely broken and the answer is that if I don't like it, don't use it?

I certainly wouldn't stress over it as any changes will take a long time to develop and implement, if a new system is designed at all. There are so many people who get offended on both sides, that I doubt there will ever be an effective consensus unless someone comes up with an ingenious system that somehow makes everyone happy.

Until that day comes, I would say to keep crunching and don't stress out about the credits. After all, they're just an arbitrary number.

Myself I would like to see Bitcoin Utopia pulled from BOINC altogether.
I believe that any Money Generating Project should NOT be part of BOINC.

I find this from Tex1954 to be my belief as well.

"First of all, I always thought of and think of BOINC projects as being based in humanitarian and research projects of all types. Thinking this way causes me to believe the following though I know there is no formal BOINC statement to this effect."

Sorry, but this isn't going to happen. The Boinc team recently released a new version that now gives support for ASICS. Furthermore, there are things in the works were SETI itself may be a beneficiary. Also, if you will go to the Bitcoin Utopia web page, you will see who else has recently benefited...

Nobody really "controls" who can and can't use BOINC, it's open-source software. Anybody can use it for anything they like. Therefore, I think the people who have/are going to quit BOINC altogether because Bitcoin Utopia is using the BOINC platform are just plain crazy.

BOINCstats and MilkyWay@Home have both benefited from Bitcoin Utopia. The only thing you will see happen, is that some stats sites may not include them in their stats. In fact, I would be all for a system where you could choose projects to include/exclude in your credit comparison, so that you could get a "combined" stats that includes projects you find agreeable. Being able to post a link to those stats would be pretty cool as well, but would likely require a fair bit of programming to accomplish.

I am seeing many folks make billions of points per day with some miners... BCU does help the projects in a very real way with $$$ and that is totally to the good!

But when I see someone with maybe $250 worth of hardware climb the ranks 1 bil per day as compared to others that have invested many thousands of $$$, it's sad.

BCU is a fund raiser for BOINC projects and says so. But, in my mind, it's no different than asking for donations and getting a T-Shirt... The obvious comparison is for BCU to issue only 1 credit per WU and not thousands... or to issue ZERO credit... Or to give away a t-shirt after so many WU's completed...

I am ALL FOR a way to exclude BCU and maybe others from Combined Stats...



Failing that, I can see a future project that gives all teams the same amount of credit per day that BCU gives in total so the net difference is ZERO...