Running the Numbers.

These days, scientists are very excited about the growth of distributed computing, a technology that makes use of the idle processing power of thousands of PCs around the world to complete massive tasks that would take years to perform on a single supercomputer. In this setting, PC owners keep their computers turned on so that scientists and mathematicians can make use of the underutilized processing capacities in their machines. A second type of distributed computing enlists PC owners in such rote, time-consuming tasks as proofreading, filing, and cataloging.

To date, distributed computing projects have generally focused on laborious scientific endeavors, such as human genetic mapping or compiling an inventory of all known craters on Mars. Participants either allow their idle computers to be used to supplement the power of the researchers' units or actually help to perform time-consuming tasks such as calculating the longest prime number. Research in the fields of medicine, physics, mathematics, and astronomy has dominated the field up until now, but it's not hard to imagine other applications that would benefit humanity at a much more immediate, grass-roots level.

The most obvious beneficiary of distributed computing would be the motion picture industry. At present, the decision to green-light a film is made by a very small group of people, some with very small brains. No more than a handful of people were involved in the decision to make The Postman, Meet Joe Black, Little Nicky, Battleship Earth, and other box-office disasters, and no more than a handful of people supplied them with the facts and figures used to make these decisions. Immense amounts of money were squandered, reputations were tarnished, and the consumer was left, as is so often the case, chagrined, puzzled, shortchanged, miffed.

Most of this misfortune might have been avoided had the producers of these films enlisted the aid of the PC-owning, movie-going public. By harnessing the enormous processing power of the cinephilic community's PCs--or merely by taking a poll of several million film-loving PC owners--Hollywood would have known that the public would not respond with great enthusiasm to a three-hour film about a counterfeit postman cast adrift in a post-nuclear wilderness, or one in which Brad Pitt plays Death. That same approach might have persuaded Hollywood not to bankroll the dismal Wyatt Earp, the absurd Waterworld, or Julia Ormond's career. Subtle calculations done via distributed computing also might have spared the public Madonna's past 10 movies.

Obviously, even a vast network of PCs has its prognosticative limits, so no one can say for sure whether any unit could ever generate enough power to devise a storyline for an acceptable Shaquille O'Neal movie. But there are many other less demanding tasks. Surely, by scouring all known humor databases, a network of several million PCs could come up with more jokes than were to be found in Woody Allen's past six movies.

Distributed computing could also be of great help to Wall Street. In the past few months, companies such as eToys, Pets.com, and mylackey.com have all crashed and burned after splashy IPOs. Had the resources of innumerable PCs been used to run the numbers, Wall Street analysts would have been able to determine how long it would take shareholders to earn back their investments in these dodgy firms. (That in fact may have proven to be the highest prime number.)

Is there a downside to distributed computing? Sadly, yes. Falsified research concocted by misguided hackers might result in a remake of My Fair Lady starring Marilyn Manson or scientific "proof" that Picasso's Guernica was actually painted by Norman Rockwell. There is also the daunting possibility that distributed computing could be abused by unscrupulous politicians. A politician running short on excuses for his myriad transgressions could discover new, even more cunning explanations for his egregious behavior.

Yet for every criticism of this marvelous innovation, there are dozens of countervailing benefits. In all likelihood, the far-reaching numbers-crunching powers of distributed computing would have spared this nation both the XFL and the dot-com bubble. This in itself should be sufficient motivation for the rest of us to keep our computers running 24 hours a day. It's not just smart--it's downright patriotic.

Joe Queenan's column appears monthly. Write him at [e-mail].