The latest version is not always the best, I'm on the latest 5 before they messed things up for half the projects.

What of it? You make a distinction to no effect.

I can't make it any simpler. Version 6 of VB breaks some projects. So I use 5, which works with all of them.

What you describe as "best" is actually leveling down to the least capable/updated project and has nothing to do with the product.
Some might describe this as the "worst", not the best.
Point being, it has nothing to do with me that you have to use the lowest common denominator version of VBox so that you don't break some of the variety of projects you chose to run. Your problem.

It really is best you don't act like you know what's going on with my systems better than I do when the sum-total of everything you know doesn't exceed zero.

You're the one that got hacked. Better rethink your password strategy.

As clearly explained at the outset, I haven't been hacked at all. As well as the zero you know, either learn to read or learn to comprehend what you've read. I have no interest in being a target of your lack of comprehension.

Virus databases are updated multiple times daily. Of course updating before scanning is relevant. If you have no idea, that's your problem, not mine.
And if you're conflating updating virus databases with program updates and whatever access issue some companies have had, even moreso.

You're the one talking about program updates, not AV updates.

I'm talking about all of them, not the only one you think I'm talking about. Ditto the earlier comment.

Which is fine, because I wasn't exclusively talking about viruses (in fact not talking about viruses at all)

Viruses are the only dangerous ones.

Not in this case. Ditto the earlier comment.

I'm afraid you're relying on a reputation that disappeared in the early 2000s and are hanging onto it like grim death.
Combined with the fact that Norton is the only software able to find and internally update elements of Windows that Windows itself can't find and update, I'm more than happy with it.

Norton always has been and always will be a rip off.

Confirming my point precisely

WTF? You've forgotten which side of the argument you're on. I like AVG, you like Norton.

I haven't forgotten anything. 'Hanging on like grim death to a reputation that disappeared in the early 2000s' is the relevant part.

Not that I'm talking about viruses per se, but it's not possible to say what allows anything onto a system as the weakest link by far is always the user.

Then why do you need Norton?

Reliable automation and silent threats primarily. The same applies to any AV product - depending very much on its reliability.

But aside from that, all independent testing reports AVG-free low down compared to other providers and Norton very high up, even against zero-day threats.

We all know about bribery and advertising. Just like the first link in Google is paid for and nothing to do with what you were looking for.

Fascinating... if not for the fact that the two sites that provide the best independent testing carry no advertising, so a point of zero relevance.
Your simplistic riposte relies on everyone having a lower level of insight than you, which would be pretty hard to achieve tbh.

And that's been so for the dozen-plus years I was more involved in comparing them as well as the other day when I looked at the most recent results. Combine that with the integrated nature of Norton (Firewall, VPN, Anti-tracking, DarkWeb monitoring and separate utilities) contained in the package, AVG falls into the toytown bracket I'm afraid.

And yet I see it consistently cleaning up very nasty viruses Norton failed to.

Your one example, of dubious believability tbh, is doing a heck of a lot of work here. It's already morphed from one example into a sufficient sample to make a claim lasting the best part of two decades to my knowledge.

Unfortunately, people who like to get everything free do like to claim that a failure to report problems it can't find is some kind of guarantee of comprehensive quality. That always gets a laugh from me.
I wouldn't worry about what I pay for. All my devices are covered by otherwise unused licences

The day I pay for software is the day programmers stop putting bugs in it.

Just as well your employer doesn't take the same view of you

---

I haven't had any WUs for weeks. No explanation or notices. Is it time to disconnect from this project?

Go to your Account page, Computers and click on View, click on Details, down near the bottom should be an option relating to Python Tasks, click on Allow.
And it's probably worth reducing the size of your cache to avoid missing deadlines.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Thanks for helping but I opened my account, opened my computer and details but I don't see anything about allowing Python WUs. I take it these files must be very large. What would be a good cache size to manage these files?

---

You should see something like this.

I take it these files must be very large. What would be a good cache size to manage these files?

The cache has nothing to do with the size of the Tasks, it has to do with how many days work you keep on the system.
Running more than one Project, there really isn't any need for a cache at all (0.1 days and 0.01 additional days is plenty). With just one project, half a day is more than enough.

Rosetta work deadlines are 3 days, your Task history shows around 2.5 days to return work, which would mean there would be times where you would miss a deadline. With a 1 day cache (or less) there would be next to no chance of running in to deadline issues under normal circumstances.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

What you describe as "best" is actually leveling down to the least capable/updated project and has nothing to do with the product.
Some might describe this as the "worst", not the best.
Point being, it has nothing to do with me that you have to use the lowest common denominator version of VBox so that you don't break some of the variety of projects you chose to run. Your problem.

It's called backwards compatibility and Oracle can't be arsed doing it. Why should the project have to rewrite it's code?

As clearly explained at the outset, I haven't been hacked at all. As well as the zero you know, either learn to read or learn to comprehend what you've read. I have no interest in being a target of your lack of comprehension.

If you had the sense to use different passwords everywhere, then one company getting hacked would not have affected anything but your account with them.

I'm talking about all of them, not the only one you think I'm talking about. Ditto the earlier comment.

You seem to think updating programs other than AV is important for security. Most things update themselves anyway, not sure how you managed to forget to do that.

I haven't forgotten anything. 'Hanging on like grim death to a reputation that disappeared in the early 2000s' is the relevant part.

I said "Norton always has been and always will be a rip off." and you agreed with "Confirming my point precisely". So why do you use a product you consider to be a rip off?

Reliable automation and silent threats primarily. The same applies to any AV product - depending very much on its reliability.

Your words were "the weakest link by far is always the user." - are you the weakest link? If not, you don't need AV.

Fascinating... if not for the fact that the two sites that provide the best independent testing carry no advertising, so a point of zero relevance.

Hidden advertising. There may be no banners you can see, but the one they rate highest is the one that paid the most. for example, when I sell things on Ebay, I can elect to give them a higher percentage of the sale if my results show before others.

Your one example, of dubious believability tbh, is doing a heck of a lot of work here. It's already morphed from one example into a sufficient sample to make a claim lasting the best part of two decades to my knowledge.

I used to repair, build, and upgrade PCs for a living. I received many unusable computers with viruses that got past Norton. In half the cases, Norton just stopped bothering to upgrade and didn't inform the user. In the other half, it just didn't know it was a virus. In fact I can't remember a single virus ridden computer with anything but Norton.

Just as well your employer doesn't take the same view of you

I never make mistakes. I was always praised for getting the job done without moaning about stupid things like health and softy. I saved my employers a fortune by doing jobs a contractor would have charged three times as much to do.

I take it these files must be very large. What would be a good cache size to manage these files?

The cache has nothing to do with the size of the Tasks, it has to do with how many days work you keep on the system.
Running more than one Project, there really isn't any need for a cache at all (0.1 days and 0.01 additional days is plenty). With just one project, half a day is more than enough.

Rosetta work deadlines are 3 days, your Task history shows around 2.5 days to return work, which would mean there would be times where you would miss a deadline. With a 1 day cache (or less) there would be next to no chance of running in to deadline issues under normal circumstances.

Thanks I run several projects at once. I haven't noticed any missed deadlines, unless I go on vacation or something. As fa as I know the project sends the number of WUs it thinks I can handle. Anyway, why are there no WUs? All I get are Einstein and Milkyway WUs.

---

Thanks I run several projects at once. I haven't noticed any missed deadlines, unless I go on vacation or something. As fa as I know the project sends the number of WUs it thinks I can handle. Anyway, why are there no WUs? All I get are Einstein and Milkyway WUs.

I leave my 7 computers and 3 phones running when on vacation.

Some projects give stupid estimates for time. For example Einstein CPU tasks take me 8 hours on a fast computer and a day and a half on a slow computer. Yet on the slow computer they start off by saying estimated 2 hours, so they download way more than they can do on time.

There are mainly only Virtual Box Python tasks available here, it's been that way for a while. Do you have:

1) Virtual Box installed?
2) VT-X or equivalent enabled in the BIOS?
3) Check your computer on your account here, at the bottom of it's details, "virtual box jobs" needs to be turned on. If it has a skip button, they're already on. If it has an allow button, press it. You might have to do that again if you fail a few tasks and it bans your computer.

P.S. I'm on Einstein and Milkyway too. I collected 12 Radeon R9 280X cards which are damn good at double precision. 38 seconds per task each! They heat the place for the things in my picture.

On Einstein I've been trying to get those Radio Wave ones for GPU. Unfortunately Bernd has something important to do for a week so the beta testing is halted.

[snip]

Thanks I run several projects at once. I haven't noticed any missed deadlines, unless I go on vacation or something. As fa as I know the project sends the number of WUs it thinks I can handle. Anyway, why are there no WUs? All I get are Einstein and Milkyway WUs.

A few possibilities:

1. All the remaining workunits are set up to run only under operating systems other than the one you're using.

2. You didn't get many from the Einstein and Milkyway projects for a while, and now BOINC is requesting more from them to make up.

3, The Rosetta server has decided that tasks sent to your computer are too likely to fail, and therefore it should avoid sending any more.

3, The Rosetta server has decided that tasks sent to your computer are too likely to fail, and therefore it should avoid sending any more.

This is most likely. And "too likely" can mean you failed one single task.

Thanks for helping but I opened my account, opened my computer and details but I don't see anything about allowing Python WUs. I take it these files must be very large. What would be a good cache size to manage these files?

As kotenok2000 posted with their screen shot, down the bottom of the page are Virtual Box VM jobs. If the box say Allow (or Enable or whatever) then you need to click it to get those Tasks again.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

[snip]

Some projects give stupid estimates for time. For example Einstein CPU tasks take me 8 hours on a fast computer and a day and a half on a slow computer. Yet on the slow computer they start off by saying estimated 2 hours, so they download way more than they can do on time.

GPUGRID is worse - all task start out with an expected runtime of about 400 days, and a deadline more like a week.

This usually gives them the highest priority for GPU use at first. Once they get progress enough to have an expected remaining time of about half a day, they'll let other GPU tasks run instead. Actual run time is seldom more than five and a half days.

Another peculiarity of GPUGRID tasks - if they resume from a checkpoint, they will initially show a progress no more than 2%. This will be corrected when the next checkpoint is written.

GPUGRID is worse - all task start out with an expected runtime of about 400 days, and a deadline more like a week.

This usually gives them the highest priority for GPU use at first. Once they get progress enough to have an expected remaining time of about half a day, they'll let other GPU tasks run instead. Actual run time is seldom more than five and a half days.

Another peculiarity of GPUGRID tasks - if they resume from a checkpoint, they will initially show a progress no more than 2%. This will be corrected when the next checkpoint is written.

And CPDN give a deadline of 1 year, even though they want them in 1 month. I told them how stupid this was but they didn't want to get in the way of other projects. I explained my computers just leave them and do other stuff depending on what other projects they're attached to, but they didn't understand. I give up talking to imbeciles.

I have 7 Rosetta Python tasks, but Rosetta is taking up a whopping 61.77 GB of disk space.

Is this normal?

I have 7 Rosetta Python tasks, but Rosetta is taking up a whopping 61.77 GB of disk space.

Is this normal?

Yes. On my Ryzen 3900X for example, when I wanted to run 18 or more Pythons, I had to increase the SSD from 250 GB to 500 GB.
So that is what I buy as standard now.

---

I have 7 Rosetta Python tasks, but Rosetta is taking up a whopping 61.77 GB of disk space.

Is this normal?

Yes. On my Ryzen 3900X for example, when I wanted to run 18 or more Pythons, I had to increase the SSD from 250 GB to 500 GB.
So that is what I buy as standard now.

I have a dedicated 500GB drive due to Rosies increased appetite for disk space, plus I had to increase my RAM due to Python being so big. But now it seems they have shrunk the memory requirements or maybe since I don't run RAH on all the cores, my memory requirements have gone down. Even with running LHC ATLAS.

Yes. On my Ryzen 3900X for example, when I wanted to run 18 or more Pythons, I had to increase the SSD from 250 GB to 500 GB.
So that is what I buy as standard now.

I have a dedicated 500GB drive due to Rosies increased appetite for disk space, plus I had to increase my RAM due to Python being so big. But now it seems they have shrunk the memory requirements or maybe since I don't run RAH on all the cores, my memory requirements have gone down. Even with running LHC ATLAS.

I have a 1TB SSD on here, but that's for games and many applications too. On my Boinc only machines, I just have 128GB or 256GB. Admittedly the 24 core machines are at least 256. As for RAM I have 64GB on 24 core machines, they will take 128.

Oh well. I do have VB installed. If Rosetta is ruling out Windows 10 as an operating system to run on it would seem to be giving up on a lot of potential clients to run data on. I've been doing Rosetta for over 17 years and I've never run into anything like this so it seems rather improbable. So it's going to cut me off because I "failed" 1 WU after the almost 2,000,000 WUs I've processed over the years? I'm sure you realize what a prick and an asshole you sound like and are doing it on purpose. At any rate they aren't sending any more WUs my way so I am pulling the plug and disconnecting. I hope the WUs I processed did some good.

---

What if you compress slots directory with ntfs compression?

I run gtx 1650 and it completes python tasks in approximately 19 hours.