Science, as we are dealing with it, is not perfect. Computers develop "enhancements" all by themselves and occasionally fail. Computer programs contain bugs that once in a while just plain cannot be found. These are but a few of the certainties that we live with here in the DC community. However, there is one thing that I just cannot grasp.

Although I doubt that anyone has attempted to break it, and based upon Howard's challenge that they could, it is apparent that the code to prevent cheating seems to be doing as it was designed to do. That code IMHO absolutely and positively belongs in the program. Now, that said, it is also apparent that the code also has a negative side to it, as it stands.

Because of that code any flaw, glitch or whatever you may call it in the foldit.lst file results, in MOST cases, the total loss of all cached work. Frustration is something that scientists must learn to live with on a daily basis it goes with the territory. We, those who willingly and of our own accord donate our computers and the associated costs to run them to the various projects, generally do not deal with frustration on a daily basis. We do not have to deal with "Oh damn, I spilled my coffee in the petri dish and will have to start over from scratch", or "Oh my, the refrigeration failed and ruined my project." No, we only deal with the frustration of seeing the work generated by our own bought and paid for resources flushed down the drain because of some bug, error or whatever that results in completed production being rendered worthless. I am relatively sure that that frustration is without a doubt the cause of many having left our ranks here. I may be wrong but I sure doubt it.

I do not profess to be computer hardware literate, at best I am a novice. I do not profess to be programming literate. I took one semester of some programming course a lot of years ago and likely do not remember a thing I learned. I do however possess a fair amount of common sense. I do know that if it starts to rain that one should either get an umbrella or get inside. That same common sense leads me to believe that if code can be written to curtail cheating, that there must be and likely is a way to expand that code such that a safe guard could be put in place to "back up" to the most recent previous "good/uncorrupted/redundant" file, other than using "purgelist" which seldom ever works, and that it could be uploaded. Perhaps I am thinking along the lines of a railroad track that has two separate tracks that never cross each other, a break in one does not render the other useless.

I've lost my share of output over the past year and a half as have others. I've stuck it out and likely will in the future. This problem, in and by itself, seems to be the most irritating of late though and I know first hand of others who have thrown in the towel because of it. The DF powers that be have been extremely responsive since day one in addressing problems here. This one however seems to be a "That's the way it is. Like it or leave it." and I just do not understand why. There must be a solution to this without jeopardizing the security. What is it?