View source for 2013.05.15 Dev Chat

<p><em>( Link back to [[Dev Chat]] archive )</em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: 10px;">On Scripting &amp; Labs</span></strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>jeehyung: hi all : ] [6:02 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: u can come in anyway [6:02 PM]</p>
<p>Matt Indykiewicz: ... [6:02 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy Glad I'm welcomed : P [6:02 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: how are you today Jee? [6:02 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd - I'm good : ] [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Ah. Cloud Lab! [6:02 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: As always please throw in any question/suggestion about Eterna [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Eli - you had some? [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>Matt Indykiewicz: Hello Jandrsonlee [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>Matt Indykiewicz: and Jeehyung [6:04 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: yep, JL [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: hi Matt [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: @Jee, Mat suggest that we get keyboard shortcuts listed in the menu. So we have an in-game help. [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>hoglahoo: jee can we hold the next meeting on a white sand beach somewhere? [6:04 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: grand cayman [6:04 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: (all expense paid?) [6:03 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: ok done [6:04 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: next [6:04 PM]</p>
<p>Matt Indykiewicz: all inclusive [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @hoglahoo, lroppy well I'll do my best to convince Adrien and Rhiju :P [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Have the secstruct string been cleaned? If not, what to do with non (.) [6:04 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Eli like a cheatsheet for shortcuts? [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: yes, I have a list for now [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jTrH2bAj-WXbDlNjSU-ZixEpZgSW4mhHeniAX2JUcGg/edit [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: Until you get an official list made [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson sorry I don't understand the question. cleared secstruct? [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: in the database, some of the secondary structure strings have non (.) characters - or did [6:05 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Like Magic Bottle with x's [6:06 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Eli super. We are getting a few new students working over the summer. Maybe this'll be a good practce for them [6:06 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: great [6:07 PM]</p>
<p>Matt Indykiewicz: I think we should be able to delete our own puzzles [6:07 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: about voting on proposed labs... unlimited? any rules? how does it work? [6:07 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @jandersonn Ahh...I remember adding special notation (x) to secstruct somewhere..but not sure what that was for. Can you tell me what the nid of the puzzle is? [6:07 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: http://kws.eternadev.org/web/puzzle/13713/ [6:07 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando - right now unlimited. The number of votes are hidden, and the most voted gets selected. [6:08 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: ok, thanks [6:08 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: We are in a trial phase, so any suggestion is welcomed about the voting [6:08 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson Ah...for that one, I'm pretty sure Sneh (our former dev) used x out of confusion. Doesn't mean anything. [6:09 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: well, if everyone can vote for all, it's gonna be hard to choose... [6:09 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @jee: confuses the scripts though [6:09 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: seem to b treated as '.' though [6:09 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson oops sorry about that. I suggest treating any none (.) as x for now. Meanwhile I'll ask Justin to clean those up. [6:10 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @jee: ok thanks [6:10 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: did you want players to set number of requested slots for synthesis at 80? [6:10 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: also, I don't understand the limits for the proposed labs, they currently are about max GC or min GU, which we never had in labs, and those we usually have in labs (consecutive nts) are absent [6:10 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: (or I'm drunk again, and missed them) [6:11 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: @ Nando - the normal lab constraints are still there [6:11 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando it seeemed like not everyone used up all the votes in the labs. So we thought why not try no limits - of course, we'll have to set the limit if everyone votes for the everything as you said [6:11 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: @Jee, I would love if we just automatically could see when we get a new message. Then we wouldn't be spamming the chat with lots of messages containing mainly the words, PM and BACK. [6:11 PM]</p>
<p>Meechl: I think it'd be nice to have a submission phase before voting. It might be easier to vote if you knew you were looking at all possible designs. [6:12 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: However Jee, there is no way to preview a lab design, in order to check if that player has locked every base pair, or something like that [6:12 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: I think there will be a need for separate update of the boxes then. We don't want the chat log to be updated every minute, as that would clear former chat. But it would be nice if the message system updated at after a certain minute interval - perhaps 5 or 10 minutes. [6:12 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: I like meechi's idea [6:12 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd - acutally, those numbers depend on what you want to do with your project. If you need only 10, you should only write down 10. If you need 1000 - wrtie down 1000, although it's not guaranteed you'll get the requrested slots [6:12 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: I like Mechls idea too [6:13 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: I was just meaning for this trial run :) Since you had earlier said all labs would get 80 pulled [6:13 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando Brourd, yes actually the usual lab constraints are automatically added. We should add a way to preview the puzzle - noted [6:13 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: +1 on preview [6:13 PM]</p>
<p>hoglahoo: I would like to know if there are any other ideas like meechl's before I say whether I like it [6:13 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Eli - noted about the message notification [6:13 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: THx Jee, addition: It shouldn&rsquo;t check too often. As Mat suggests, it will be good if we had options, so one could individually set how often it searched for updates. [6:14 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @meechl this is interesting. So when the normal cloud lab round is going on (1month) we could perhaps use 2 weeks for submission and 2 weeks for voting? [6:14 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: about base locking in labs, could it be conceivable to have things that would match GNRA or YNMG for instance ? [6:14 PM]</p>
<p>Meechl: Or maybe 3 weeks and then 1 week for voting? I'm not sure what would work best [6:15 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: Jee, I think the designing takes longer than the voting [6:15 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @jee: auto-testing of Puzzle Solving scripts seems sporadic [6:14 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: Again I like what Meechl says :) [6:15 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: and I liked the old way of running it on a half-dozen by request [6:15 PM]</p>
<p>Meechl: It might also be nice to have different submission and voting phases for the lab designs, because the way it is now, the earlier you make a design, the more likely you'll get votes [6:16 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: +1 submit before vote [6:15 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando that would mean specifying 2 or more identity for the bases instead of 1 - correct? [6:16 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: yes [6:16 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: please explain to rest of us... [6:16 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: it's related to Omei's proposed lab, he has to limit to pure GAAA [6:17 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson the testing takes a lot of time since it runs on the server side. We are trying to see if we can get more computing power [6:17 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: but GNRA would be more generic [6:17 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: R = G or A N = any [6:16 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Hmmm, I think with the entire voting/submission phase [6:17 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: Y = C or U, M = C or A [6:17 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: D = not C, etc [6:17 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: That would have been more important before 80 designs were being synthesized per lab. [6:18 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Now that it is, your chances of synthesis are quite high with even only one vote [6:18 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @Broud: but may need to limit active labs to get participation/submission [6:18 PM]</p>
<p>Meechl: Good points, Brourd. But it could also give you a chance to delete a design before someone votes on it if you decide you don't like it [6:19 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Oh, are we talking about lab submissions or about lab proposals? [6:19 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @Meechi - I though you meant proposals too [6:19 PM]</p>
<p>Meechl: I was talking about both [6:19 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: Maybe we should setup a forum discussion about submission/voting separation. This might need more attentions from more players.. [6:19 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: I actually agree with Meechl that it should be applied to both. It'll be better to have a consistent system [6:20 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: well, I'm not sure if you can delete proposals [6:20 PM]</p>
<p>Meechl: Yes, we can have players vote on how to vote... [6:20 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: :) [6:20 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Speaking of deleteing - I'd like better version control on scripts including a delete [6:20 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: So often I submit and then 5 minutes later find a bug :P [6:20 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: hi everyone :) [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: and since lab proposal votes are unlimited, you can change those whenever you wish [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: hi Justin [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Hi and welcome [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson - agreed on the delete [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: hi Justin :) [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: Hey Justin : ] [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: let me help Jee about script [6:21 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: Good evening friends. [6:22 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: hi JL, Eli, Nando [6:22 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: @ Jee- pm a few hours ago [6:22 PM]</p>
<p>Matt Indykiewicz: hi jieux [6:22 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: evening, Jieux :) [6:22 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: yo B&amp;H [6:22 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: With over 5000 puzzles it can take over an hour to run all cases on a script. Seems excessive for the default [6:22 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Jieux, I saw it just now : I'll respond after the dev chat [6:23 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: okies... no biggie [6:23 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: @JL yes beyond our expecation it took so long time [6:24 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson, hm. Perhaps we should have a tier system? You test on basic set (10 puzzles) then move onto harder puzzles, and so on..? [6:24 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: how about a filtering subset [6:24 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: under user control [6:24 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: use same search logic as we use on player search now [6:25 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: and return same type of subset [6:25 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: What happened to the synth rankings? [6:25 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy you mean allowing users to choose which puzzles their scripts can be tested on? [6:25 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: yes [6:25 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: might be good to have a standar set of 100 puzzles that seem to have varying difficulties, but are run against all scripts [6:25 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: &lt;2 minute to run a test set on a new script [6:26 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy hmm that's an interesting feature we could add. [6:26 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: randomly pick out X number of puzzles, if it has above X% success rate, then test on all puzzles created janderson? [6:27 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy We want all the scripts to compete with each other so we'll still need a common set that scripts are tested upon [6:27 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: no clash there [6:27 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @Brourd: or queue for fuller testing once a week [6:27 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Jieux synth rankings? [6:27 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: but if someone designs a script to solve a partiuclar type of puzzle, then they could specify a bit more which puzzles to run against [6:28 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: The 100 could be a "benchmark" set - changed once a month or so. [6:27 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: when you sort players... there is an option to sort by points, latest to join... and a synthesis ranking. [6:28 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy that's a good point. "Testing upon request" feature will be useful [6:28 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: synth ranking has been blank for a few months... [6:29 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Or graded benchmarks: tough, moderate, easy [6:28 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson,@Brourd I like the bencmark idea... [6:29 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: @ Jee - every script is given the chance to output at least one sequence to test against the structure, correct? [6:29 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @kws what do you think? [6:29 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: (brourd shouldn't have to keep track of this for us) :) [6:29 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd yes - although it is taking extremely long time now. [6:29 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Also right now we only get the structure - what about constaints? switches? [6:29 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: yes, the largest structures can take 2+ seconds to timeout [6:30 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: at times, I notice that the wiki server is very slow, are you guys running the remotely on that machine ? [6:30 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: the *tests [6:30 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: I think it's good idea but why don't we just let auto test do even if it takes long time? And only local script interface can get test result directly as I said in email thread [6:30 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: I think it'll be a great motive for users to use local interface and contribute their own work conveniently [6:31 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson we'll have to add those features in as well. There are just a lot we should add to the base library. [6:31 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Auto test once on submission, then periodically (weekly?) to try against new puzzles? [6:31 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: yes [6:32 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando Actually wiki server and the test server is different. I'll have to query about the wiki server speed problem. [6:32 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: @Jee, apropos WIKI. Nando wishes for having the WIKI news feed updated to the actually latest recent changes. By the way, thx for the fine addition. I like it. [6:32 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: speaking of server issues - we have been drupalled a lot this past week [6:33 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Eli, @nando good idea. real time feed will be nice. Noted. [6:33 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: ok, it's intermittent, that's all I can say [6:33 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: thx, Jee [6:33 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: real time feed may be tricky to do... [6:33 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: you don't want to refresh the list every time I do an edit [6:33 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd what was the thing about the 2 seconds? [6:34 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: Just the latest day addition will be fine [6:34 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando we could setup a cronjob which will pull the latest and cache it daily [6:34 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: So not exactly daily [6:34 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: oh, just an observation about the timeout being 2+ seconds due to large structures [6:35 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @jee/justin: also - any standards for RNA Scoring/Strategy Market scripts? [6:34 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: @Brourd ok but 2+ seconds will double auto testing time..:) [6:35 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: by the way Jee, is there any chance of adding something like a "puzzle solving rank" for players who have solved the most puzzles so far [6:35 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy about the Drupal problem, yes I'm investigating the issue...apparently it's a known bug in Drupal dealing with large database. I updated few fixes this morning..hopefully this time it'll work. [6:35 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: k thx [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: @ kws, oh no, I don't mean add more on :) [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: when we run into it, I assume there is nothing we can do from user side...? [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd we definitely can. noted. [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy unfortunately no. I have to directly deal with the db server [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: just that the larger structures will take so long to run for most scripts [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: @Jee, Hoglahoo brought up that the hotkeys are only working half the time when the advanced energy option is turned on. One has to click in screen to get them reactivated [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: maybe a longer timeout only for larger puzzles? [6:36 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: perhaps if we made it where structures larger than X number of nucleotides are ran differently [6:37 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Jieux I confirmed that the synth rankning is not working - will look into it. [6:37 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @jee/justin: also - any standards for RNA Scoring/Strategy Market scripts? [6:37 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: @JL we don't have any specific standards about RNA scoring now but this week I'll implement a new feature that test RNA scoring scripts on lab puzzles [6:38 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: Cool, Justin [6:38 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: way cool [6:38 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: Thanks!! [6:38 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: inputs? outputs? [6:38 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson we are still looking into it. But it should be similar to puzzle solving script standard. It should take in a sequence and output a score between 0-100 [6:39 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: sequence + secstruct I meant [6:39 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: yes similar to puzzle solving [6:39 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: seqeunce + structure [6:38 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: right [6:39 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: Then it'll be the strategy market finally crowdsourced [6:39 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: @ Jee - I've tried running a few structures through the EteRNAbot design site, but don't get an output sequence. [6:40 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: :) [6:39 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd - oh. ok will see what's going on with the eternabot [6:40 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Are there any specific structures or anything that can cause it to fail? [6:40 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: for example, I think I tried running the "Ball and Chain" lab [6:41 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd it could get really slow if the structure is really long...but other than that No.. [6:41 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: Ah. It does have hard time with puzzles with LOTS of internals and bulges [6:41 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: ah [6:41 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: shart stacks, lots of loops [6:42 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: just doesn't have a good strategy I guess? [6:42 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: how close are we to getting a save feature. so we can control our save points [6:42 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: requested by numerous players [6:42 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: ha, for a second there lroppy, I saw "slave feature" [6:42 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: low cost labor - hmm [6:42 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: keep yr fantasies out of it Brourd [6:43 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: lol :D [6:43 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: hehe [6:43 PM]</p>
<p>Zanna: lol, you guys [6:43 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: @Jee, I will like to resurface an old idea from Dimension9. I would like to be able to see percentage, of GC, AU and GU pairs, while I&rsquo;m doing the designing. Not just the current numbers of basepairs in the toolbox. I can see the percentage before I have published the puzzle and can see the percentage in the Lab Results list. [6:43 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy I'm hoping to assign it to the new students who'll be starting late May. A lot of requested feature about general game/website should be handled by them [6:44 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: and then always adjust for the bar code, please [6:44 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Ah yes - lab submissions - any chance of better sort/filter options? [6:44 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: gr8, thx [6:44 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Eli - noted about pair percentages [6:44 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: the stats are all wrong due to the barcode [6:44 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: thx, Jee [6:45 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: @ Jee... thanks. [6:45 PM]</p>
<p>jnicol: I would like to see the energy of the natural fold while still in target mode, instead of flipping back and forth to see both energies [6:45 PM]</p>
<p>jnicol: and hi all :) [6:45 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @janderson not advanced sort/filter options. But we almost have a html version of the lab submission browser which is lot faster to use. [6:45 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @jnicole +1 [6:45 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: hi John :) [6:45 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @jnicol -noted about the energy [6:46 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: @ Jee - I saw that the Rhiju has the switch results, any ETA on when those will in game, at least for a switch score? [6:46 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: @jee: the wiki's look-and-feel (stylesheet) really needs fixing... and a decent hostname, even a eternadev.org one while waiting for a cmu|stanford.edu [6:46 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: also the old Player Project Data? [6:46 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd actually I'm the bottleneck in the process. I'm trying to coordinate scoring of those switches and there have been some mixups. [6:47 PM]</p>
<p>eternacac: hi all [6:47 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: @Nando Diana did best to fix wiki but she afraids of ruin your work :) [6:47 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: hi eternacac [6:47 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: as lroppy would say "blech" [6:48 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: Hi C [6:47 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: rightee-oh [6:48 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: @justin: a good backup before touching anything ;) [6:48 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: hi chris [6:48 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: You need the Stanford lab to everything for you Jee so you just have to hit upload :) [6:49 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: hi eternacac [6:49 PM]</p>
<p>eternacac: looks like a dev chat :) [6:49 PM]</p>
<p>Jieux: glad I could make 15 minutes of the dev. chat... take care friends.. [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd it used to be that way, Now that I'm doing the job there has been some delays. I'll try to get them up as soon as possible. [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: can we start setting up ability to tag puzzles [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: cya jieux [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: hi eternaac [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @lroppy tag? [6:49 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: yes eternac, welcome [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: thank you Jee, and no rush, I know you are quite busy with everything [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: Everyone I'll have to leave in 5 minutes - so please throw in final questions/suggestions : ] [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: like "zigzag" or [6:50 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy - noted the tag idea. [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: other items to help us rmember where we saw that structure [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: thx [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: hmmm, ETA for TRS freestyle? [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: (wanna prepare ahead of time) [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando TRS freestyle? [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: @Jee, Hoglahoo brought up that the hotkeys are only working half the time when the advanced energy option is turned on. One has to click in screen to get them reactivated [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: jee -did u also catch the issue of the stats and the barcode? [6:51 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Eli - noted. Thanks! [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Theophylline ribozyme switch, with the dynamic structure [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: great, Jee :) [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: Theophylline Ribozyme Switch, with free choice of nts and lengths [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: or, TRS freestyle [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @lroppy noted about the barcode stats [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: thank you [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: By the way Jee, the new lab proposal system looks good [6:52 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: nice work [6:53 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: @Jee, Mat is suggestion that we can sort the results in the "See results of player puzzles" list after two more things. After if the puzzles pass or fail and by Time(sec) time of run. [6:53 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Nando ah yes, we'll get back to that as soon as we successfully run the first cloud lab round. Stanford side is busy too trying new companies, etc. [6:53 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: ok, thanks [6:53 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: ah, after looking at the latest labs, I'd like to understand why we're doing in silico simulations at 37C while experiments are conducted at 24C [6:53 PM]</p>
<p>hoglahoo: Is that machine that can synthesize 20,000 designs per month up and running? [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: @Eli great idea I noted that [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: @Jee/Kws and search in scripts [6:53 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Eli - noted about the player puzzle sort [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: need to run [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: thx, Justin and Jee :) [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>lroppy: thx jee [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: bye Iroppy [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @hogla - yes it's 3-4000 thousands now. But we'll soon bump up [6:54 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Final question, was the number of allowed mutations for the TEBOWNED labs arbitrary? [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>hoglahoo: wow, cool! [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: @JL you mean search script? isn't it already implemented? [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: or did they choose 8 for some specific reason? [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>jandersonlee: ah (wipes glasses) [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>kws4679: :) [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: other than it being Elnando's favorite number [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: lol [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>Eli Fisker: Yes, is working Justin and thx for it [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: @Brourd - Actually, Tom who is in charge of the puzzle chose the number. Unfortunately I didn't have a chance to ask for the reason. [6:55 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: If you can post a question in the forum , I can redirect it to Tom [6:56 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: ah, I was wondering why it couldn't be 9 for my perfect designs :) [6:56 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: sure Jee, I'll get right on that [6:56 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: and any progress on those spam accounts? [6:56 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: Ok - time to run now. Thanks for the discussions and great feedbacks everyone. [6:56 PM]</p>
<p>jeehyung: I'll post the log on the news item [6:56 PM]</p>