Bobnova

It would be appreciated, I think, if the rules were actually published. I feel like an awful lot of misunderstandings would be avoided if the rules were all actually readable. The current rules that is.

I've been keeping quiet, but I have to say this: Yes, it can. If there is no punishment (I haven't seen any, certainly not like there was in days past!) then there is no reason beyond personal honor not to do it. How far personal honor goes is, of course, up to the end user. It prevents me from sharing HW/results. Everybody else? I have no clue. If an "Oops!" story is enough to get them off the hook that implies that it would be for the rest of us too, and that in turn says to me that we can expect an awful lot of result sharing soon here. Now like I said, the fact that I haven't seen a punishment only means just that: I haven't seen it. If it has happened and I missed it, that changes things. They're still #2/#3 though, so it can't have been much of a punishment if it existed.

I bet the www is the issue. Thanks!

There's been an improvement, I think. Now instead of spitting out that error message it just won't accept my pc05 validation link. Still an issue for the comp though.

I fill everything in (for the competition), hit submit, and am greeted by this: Oops. Something went wrong. We could blame this on you but it's most likely our crappy coding skills. You could try again or nudge our developpers for fixing this. Details: org.springframework.web.multipart.MultipartException: Could not parse multipart servlet request; nested exception is org.apache.commons.fileupload.FileUploadBase$IOFileUploadException: Processing of multipart/form-data request failed. No space left on device Stack trace: org.springframework.web.multipart.commons.CommonsMultipartResolver.parseRequest(CommonsMultipartResolver.java:162) org.springframework.web.multipart.commons.CommonsMultipartResolver.resolveMultipart(CommonsMultipartResolver.java:138) org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet.checkMultipart(DispatcherServlet.java:887) org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet.doDispatch(DispatcherServlet.java:750) org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet.doService(DispatcherServlet.java:719) org.springframework.web.servlet.FrameworkServlet.processRequest(FrameworkServlet.java:669) org.springframework.web.servlet.FrameworkServlet.doPost(FrameworkServlet.java:585) javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:641) javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:722) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:305) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:210) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationDispatcher.invoke(ApplicationDispatcher.java:684) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationDispatcher.processRequest(ApplicationDispatcher.java:471) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationDispatcher.doForward(ApplicationDispatcher.java:402) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationDispatcher.forward(ApplicationDispatcher.java:329) org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.NormalRewrittenUrl.doRewrite(NormalRewrittenUrl.java:195) org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.RuleChain.handleRewrite(RuleChain.java:159) org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.RuleChain.doRules(RuleChain.java:141) org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.UrlRewriter.processRequest(UrlRewriter.java:90) org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.UrlRewriteFilter.doFilter(UrlRewriteFilter.java:417) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:243) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:210) org.hwbot.web.filter.CookieFilter.doFilter(CookieFilter.java:189) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:243) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:210) org.springframework.web.filter.HiddenHttpMethodFilter.doFilterInternal(HiddenHttpMethodFilter.java:77) org.springframework.web.filter.OncePerRequestFilter.doFilter(OncePerRequestFilter.java:76) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:243) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:210) org.springframework.web.filter.CharacterEncodingFilter.doFilterInternal(CharacterEncodingFilter.java:88) org.springframework.web.filter.OncePerRequestFilter.doFilter(OncePerRequestFilter.java:76) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:243) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:210) org.hwbot.web.filter.MobileFilter.doFilterInternal(MobileFilter.java:46) org.springframework.web.filter.OncePerRequestFilter.doFilter(OncePerRequestFilter.java:76) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:243) org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:210) org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke(StandardWrapperValve.java:225) org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke(StandardContextValve.java:169) org.apache.catalina.authenticator.AuthenticatorBase.invoke(AuthenticatorBase.java:472) org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke(StandardHostValve.java:168) org.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke(ErrorReportValve.java:98) org.apache.catalina.valves.AccessLogValve.invoke(AccessLogValve.java:927) org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke(StandardEngineValve.java:118) org.apache.catalina.connector.CoyoteAdapter.service(CoyoteAdapter.java:407) org.apache.coyote.ajp.AjpProcessor.process(AjpProcessor.java:200) org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol$AbstractConnectionHandler.process(AbstractProtocol.java:565) org.apache.tomcat.util.net.JIoEndpoint$SocketProcessor.run(JIoEndpoint.java:307) java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:886) java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:908) java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:662)

Did that. Once. Had just cleaned the toilet thankfully. The fun part was getting all the acetone splatters off the floor before they ate a hole in it, while still covered in acetone myself.

Very nice score. Correct me of I'm wrong, but isn't a validation link an absolute requirement for any top20 global score?

Ha, on a straight run through too, that's wild. Also answers any questions about the Z77FTW's 3d01 eff. Nice!

First one, I didn't say anything about being sold. Read my post please. Second one, not provable either way. Different motherboards has not been proven. If absolute proof is now required for people to get in trouble, that's fine. It's rather hard to get, though. We got hosed, it still pisses me off. I'll STFU about it.

First pair do look suspicious. Very similar CPU clocks, same motherboard info, same ram timings. Different ram speed, but that's it. Looking suspicious was enough to get OCF in trouble, it doesn't seem to be enough to get anybody else in trouble though. Lots of hardware being around was our attempted defense too. It was ruled to be invalid. Admittedly we didn't have a nice video trailer. The second pair even more so, they even have exactly the same CPU voltage. Very suspicious looking. Exceedingly so, even. No event, no video. What will HWBot do? Will they apply the same rules to the Big Fish that they do to the Little Fish?

It certainly seems like a fairly easy fix. First you tie massman to a chair, then you torture him to force him to recite the real rules (I think we all know the difference between the rules in text and the Real Rules by now), then convert them to text. You'd think they would have been fixed by now, they've only been out of date since... oh I don't know, 2010? I too feel that the current bugs need fixing before additional features are added.

Ugh you're right. Forget it one run and naturally it's the one that gets posted. Guess I'd better resurrect a 9800GTX+ eh?

http://hwbot.org/submission/2296431_ That one finished with ~30s before competition ended. USB mouse/key did not want to initialize on submission comp, took 5s to fix. Submitted <4 seconds after comp closed. Proper expression of current feelings would likely result in a ban.

That is some serious dedication! I'm impressed.

This is my understanding as well. It is specified in the rules (for whatever that is worth) that at group events the scores went on one of the users involved's accounts. Doesn't say anything about making a special third account, but I know it's been declared to be Generally Not Good in the past.

lol that's what I meant, all that removal was when it came up dead with the pot mounted it to. Tragic, really. I need to find another one.

Is now, heh. Mounted a pot and killed it somehow, memory power circuit has a direct short to ground somewhere on the memory side of the inductor (I removed said inductor for testing). Also removed all the caps, and the diodes I soldered caps to (whoops...) and such. Might have a friend of mine transplant the core to another PCB, as it was doing rather well. Why do you ask?

Don't worry, you'll have to rebench all the PC05 results anyway as more and more tweaks show up Why was PC05 chosen? It was still alive a while ago, now it's totally broken.

PCMark05? Really? Seems like an odd choice given the recent explosion in scores and tweaks and such.

Wow. Just wow.

Not getting points for this one, but it isn't listed as invalid or anything: http://hwbot.org/submission/2266335_ Recalculate doesn't change anything.

lol a 450w TR2 as a prize? Really? Those things are awful.

That, I imagine, rather depends on whether you state your intentions or not

PiFast was run at 60x, the others are likely lower for higher ram speeds I'd imagine. Regardless, I'm excited

[jedimindtrick]There is nothing to see here...[/jedimindtrick]