请问，斯坦福大学使用 folding@home 获得的研究成果，是属于全世界还是只属于美国人？
Folding@home 號召網友貢獻運算能力，協助武漢肺炎療法開發
為了加速開發針對新型冠狀病毒（2019-nCoV）的治療方法，史丹佛大學潘德實驗室（Pande Lab）主持的 Folding@home 近日公開號召網友貢獻自家電腦的運算能力，與世界各地的研究人員一起努力。
以下略。。。
我也下载了FAH，加入到分布式计算的行列中。我的i5-8400已经跑了4个小时了。
如题，使用 folding@home 获得的研究成果，是和全世界共享还是只属于美国人的呢？
為了加速開發針對新型冠狀病毒（2019-nCoV）的治療方法，史丹佛大學潘德實驗室（Pande Lab）主持的 Folding@home 近日公開號召網友貢獻自家電腦的運算能力，與世界各地的研究人員一起努力。
以下略。。。
我也下载了FAH，加入到分布式计算的行列中。我的i5-8400已经跑了4个小时了。
如题，使用 folding@home 获得的研究成果，是和全世界共享还是只属于美国人的呢？
Who “owns” the results? What will happen to them?
Folding@home is run by an academic institution (specifically the Pande Group, at Stanford University’s Chemistry Department), which is a nonprofit institution dedicated to science research and education. We will not sell the data or make any money from it. Moreover, we will make the data available for others to use. In particular, the results from Folding@home will be made available on several levels. Most importantly, analysis of the simulations will be submitted to scientific journals for publication, and these journal articles will be posted on the web page after publication.
Following the publications of these scientific articles, we will make the raw data of the folding runs available to other researchers upon request. The data sets from some of our most prominent simulations are already publicly available. We’ve also striven to share our key technologies with other scientists, to assist their research as well.
Why don’t you post the source code?
Most of the critical parts of FAH are publicly available. The Tinker and Gromacs source codes can be downloaded and run. Unlike many computer projects, the paramount concern is not functionality, but the scientific integrity, and posting the source code in a way that would allow people to reverse engineer the code to produce bogus scientific results would make the whole project pointless. However, we stress that the vast majority of our code is already open source. We have an Open Source FAQ with more details.
Folding@home is run by an academic institution (specifically the Pande Group, at Stanford University’s Chemistry Department), which is a nonprofit institution dedicated to science research and education. We will not sell the data or make any money from it. Moreover, we will make the data available for others to use. In particular, the results from Folding@home will be made available on several levels. Most importantly, analysis of the simulations will be submitted to scientific journals for publication, and these journal articles will be posted on the web page after publication.
Following the publications of these scientific articles, we will make the raw data of the folding runs available to other researchers upon request. The data sets from some of our most prominent simulations are already publicly available. We’ve also striven to share our key technologies with other scientists, to assist their research as well.
Why don’t you post the source code?
Most of the critical parts of FAH are publicly available. The Tinker and Gromacs source codes can be downloaded and run. Unlike many computer projects, the paramount concern is not functionality, but the scientific integrity, and posting the source code in a way that would allow people to reverse engineer the code to produce bogus scientific results would make the whole project pointless. However, we stress that the vast majority of our code is already open source. We have an Open Source FAQ with more details.
是中國的因為中國會搶注專利
当前回答字数不足20，是否回复为讨论?
当前回答字数不足20，是否回复为讨论?
桂枝估计会有人搞个挖矿小程序装成这个程序拿去墙内传播
正想说项目主页基本都有对这个问题的解答，楼上已经有葱油贴出来了（不过好像什么也没说
对科研工作者来说，这个问题既是问题又不是问题。说它是，是因为每个人对「共享」和「私有」的定义不一致，比如研究人员可能认为将成果写成论文公开发表就算是「共享」了，但肯定有人会认为「就算你不申请专利也应该在发论文的时候把所有贡献算力的人员列出来」才叫做「共享」。说它不是问题，是因为分布式计算的项目最基本的要求就是「公开」：如果史丹佛倒腾出一个「我们一起拯救全人类但没时间解释了快上车」的分布式计算项目，恐怕会被认为是诱导挖矿……
歪个楼，分布式计算这件事情在刘慈欣（以及为数不少的国人眼中大概是这个样子的：
SETI风评被害
拉倒吧反正SETI快要收摊了
来源https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%90%83%E7%8A%B6%E9%97%AA%E7%94%B5_(%E5%B0%8F%E8%AF%B4)
相关章节见《球状闪电》第7章
从这件事我明白，林云的道德约束比我要少得多，为了达到目的，她可以不择手段。
对科研工作者来说，这个问题既是问题又不是问题。说它是，是因为每个人对「共享」和「私有」的定义不一致，比如研究人员可能认为将成果写成论文公开发表就算是「共享」了，但肯定有人会认为「就算你不申请专利也应该在发论文的时候把所有贡献算力的人员列出来」才叫做「共享」。说它不是问题，是因为分布式计算的项目最基本的要求就是「公开」：如果史丹佛倒腾出一个「我们一起拯救全人类但没时间解释了快上车」的分布式计算项目，恐怕会被认为是诱导挖矿……
歪个楼，分布式计算这件事情在刘慈欣（以及为数不少的国人眼中大概是这个样子的：
陈博士得知林云一直作为主要负责人之一负责军方的雷电武器研究。两人开始科研上的合作。由于数学模型计算量已超出普通计算机的能力。林云尝试入侵并劫持SETI服务器，使用分布式计算来解决研究组计算能力不足的问题。
来源https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%90%83%E7%8A%B6%E9%97%AA%E7%94%B5_(%E5%B0%8F%E8%AF%B4)
相关章节见《球状闪电》第7章
从这件事我明白，林云的道德约束比我要少得多，为了达到目的，她可以不择手段。
就算不使用folding@home，这种研究也是会公开发表的，当然是和全世界共享。
这个问题有意思。如果一个中国人捐了一美元给白宫，美国就变成中国的了吗？