I'll be discussing the potential of BOINC on Digg today at noon EST here:
https://digg.com/dialog/cooperative-computer-network

And checkout these two articles on BOINC and Volunteer Computing. Share them on Facebook, Twitter, etc and help get the word out!
https://www.inverse.com/article/6592-the-strongest-supercomputer-on-earth-still-needs-your-laptop-to-cure-cancer
https://www.inverse.com/article/9261-how-to-start-volunteer-computing-in-2016

I would suggest you take a look as Gridcoin and how they are deliberately and specifically monetizing boinc.

Since it is the fastest growing team, and they intend to dominate all projects stats everywhere. I would suggest that making Boinc a paying proposition will expand it faster than anything else would.

But your volunteerism goes right out the window. Profit over science, not what DA ever intended for Boinc.

It is something to consider, and don't just listen to me, GO to their website and read.

They are very plain in their intent.

Something Berkeley needs to start considering is the tax ramifications if they continue to allow an organization to use their trademarked and copyrighted software and name for profit making purposes.

Kinda destroys the whole point of Boinc doesn't it?

Something Berkeley needs to start considering is the tax ramifications if they continue to allow an organization to use their trademarked and copyrighted software and name for profit making purposes.

BOINC is open-source software, anyone can use it and derivative works for whatever purpose they see fit. There is no tax burden, as UC Berkeley does not see any of the profits.

I agree that profiteering is not really in the spirit of distributed computing, but it may be a necessary evil to draw new users.

---

My Detailed BOINC Stats

I agree that profiteering is not really in the spirit of distributed computing, but it may be a necessary evil to draw new users.

Well maybe it is something Berkeley doesn't have to concern it self with.

But something the individual projects will have to consider over time as their projects and names are being used for profiteering.

Over time there will be an effect of the freelance user will see their contribution and their teams contribution becoming less and less than the, (what is the term to use....) profiteering leeches take over the leader boards.

As users see that they are not really going to make any money off gridcoin, (only the crypto currency developers actually accumulate any real totals) they will leave the projects, but how many people like me they will drive away also?

I know over the last few years Boinc usage overall has been declining. lets throw greed into the mix to make the drive for user loss even faster.

Stats drive Boinc.

In many ways it is our statement to the world that we exist. If greed succeeds in driving the heavy volunteer away, what will be left for those good projects needing the computing power?

Shouldn't a project have the ability to decide if they wish to be associated with paid computing to benefit profiteers??

Shouldn't Gridcoin be made to start their own project ala Bitcoin Utopia? so their overwhelming desire for greed pervert the driving force (stats) for the rest of us?

Their production in seeking money is already taking over many projects.

Personally it is making me question my own involvement.

My Collatz production (#1 in the world) is about 7 tenths their entire collatz team production but at their rate of increase, my production will soon fall to half theirs and eventually to a small percentage.

Why should I spend hundreds of dollars for electricity each month on top of the thousands I spend building my farm, when I get no benefit from it? My team becomes irrelevant to the project?

Seems to me that the negatives towards project production outweigh the temporary surge in users hopelessly chasing a few thousandths of a penny..

Shame that Berkeley doesn't seem to think that it is not any concern of theirs.

Necessary evil, eventual worthless exercise.

It will destroy volunteer distributed computing.

---

Im part of Gridcoin team and Im sad to read how you feel about it. I have been contributing to BOINC for about 10 years, and been on team Gridcoin for over 1 year. For most of that 10 years I was not in a team, and rarely reviewed my stats. Stats/teams may drive some, but Im purely altruistic, like many folks, first and foremost Im doing it for the benefit to science.

All Gridcoin lets me do is offset my cost of electricity somewhat, so that running BOINC becomes a slightly less expensive hobby. I can actually afford to contribute more time to BOINC now and am producing more because of it.

You say 'Why should I spend hundreds of dollars for electricity each month on top of the thousands I spend building my farm, when I get no benefit from it?', but Gridcoin doesnt in any way reduce the amount of contribution you make, nor should it reduce any of the satisfaction you gain from volunteering your compute resources. No team production can make your huge individual contribution to Collatz appear diminished, why measure your personal contribution against a whole team.

In terms of stats, the Gridcoin Magnitude system is the most fair I have seen, it accurately measures the % contribution that I make across all my projects (regardless of project RAC inconsistency, NCI, GPUs or ASICs) and fairly says what % I contributed versus others. I dont really care about stats, but there you have it.

Its a sad fact that BOINC participation is reducing over time, but Gridcoin is introducing a whole new demographic to the idea of BOINC. The amount of people I communcate with who are amazed BOINC even exists, that only found out about it because of Gridcoin, makes Gridcoin valuable to BOINC for its marketing power alone. Will some of those people give up, of course (that happens to BOINC anyway), but some will stay.

Im not seeking to convince you, just telling it how I see it. I wish you (and anyone else who may read this), many happy years of BOINC contribution.