Topic: Bounty for Cracking Bitmain S9 BMminer - page 7. (Read 38682 times)

here's my view:

kman & ck good guys, helped community lots & they do keep an eye out on many crypto related stuff out there especially on cgminer part.

fubly, i;d say he is a good coder BUT he did violate the GPL earlier with s5/s7 thingy that he re-coded or invented BUT he DID NOT ask any permission from cryptoglance to use or MODIFY the software i know because i was the one who informed cryptoglance team + kman & later fubly sorted it out with CG.

There was definitely something fubly hid from the public & was NOT being honest in the earlier days & starting to charge to for his "modified" version of cgminer & CG but did not ask any permission to do so, so i'd say there's some dishonesty out there & at times he was being a little hard headed.

there is NO way that you can just by manipulating a software to gain or to improve mining speed without "touching" or modding externals such as the capability to increase voltages from the PSU say from 12V to 12.5V !!! well s7 with 45 chips version has a dc-dc converter & the ONLY known way to mod the voltages is by reprogramming/modding the HW such as PROVEN work by sidehack ! so by this in fubly's earlier thread & such claims I am totally not convinced at all & have put him into my scam list !

back to this bounty thing, fubly did what he tried to do & we do see some results & progress, would he have done it putting "X" amount of non-stop work if there was no bounty offered ? well idk, like i said he is good coder & made some changes & a little more honest this time, published many things but not all though.

kman & ck is just sticking to the GPL & prolly some personal & fair opinions.

to those who want to use the "cracked" bmminer by fubly go ahead those who thinks it is NOT right/safe to do so then stick to what is working that's ain't broken !

like i mentioned earlier, without doing anything the s9 is fragile & breaks down by itself !

some who flashed to upgrade the original fw by BMT bricked !

so it is entirely up to you s9 owners out there. i'm using original bmminer & i can mine anywhere freely.

i would support this if there are blessings from the creators.

fubly, you do not have to tell/prove to others how much work you've out in or how hard you work non-stop, the community knows & they can tell ! even before you have any +ve results or you telling how hard you've worked, the bounty was already there.

be nice, play nice, be HONEST & respect each other & you WILL get what you deserve !

ya ya, bla bla bla, just my honest 2 cents worth.

Status page it looks atm like above

change frequency

Did you not have an advanced menu to change this? On my batch I have this window.

Thanks for speaking out -CK.
 
I do understand that Fubly did a mess and violated the GPL and for sure this is not acceptable in any way at all. Fubly would not be any better than Bitmain, but.... Always a but, now when we know that, the BMminer is pure crap, aint a good idea to let some skilled people do the work for the Bounty? When you or KNAO do not have the time to make the drivers, do you think Fubly could do this?
The only thing the community is asking (Quite a job, I know) is to read through the FUBLY firmware a give it a green light, since we would not accept any bull regarding the CGminer 4.9.2 and GPL License and frankly, I do not no crap about where to look  
It would help all of us that is stuck with Bitmain crap and a violated miner and even make the KANO.IS run as the most effective pool?

S9 uses a more powerful controller than the old hardware if I'm not mistaken.

High CPU usage?! This looks normal atm.

darval has been refunded 0.25 btc

https://blockchain.info/tx/81ae318d71adcb55ba31121336dd7a56d9acd2ebaff458808832c01a5134fdf1


https://blockchain.info/address/1FH7ChGWgn3fVf96QzWAVpVABAZDWJZYWf

We are left with  d57heinz

 so when you can please contact me and supply a refund address.

I just refunded Xircom


1MyJmxS9ER5ZBNvpG3LhoUXGotpzbPowed
https://blockchain.info/tx/09a640f845e10c309fa694eb8c5be9980ef4afe5e75be4357bd52162911a9b4d

My intentions were to be helpful  and this has turned very sideways.

As I see this kano's point of view  is fubly is actively in violation with the older posted git and this new cgminer is in violation due to hidden files

And my understanding of laws protecting software are too limited to be of value here.

Since I do not knowing aid in software violations I am refunding all escrow funds.

d57heinz--------- please give me a refund address  .25 due
darval ------------please give me a refund address  .25 due

Xircom----------- >>  0.55   refunded
citronick---------- >>  0.25  refunded
NotFuzzyWarm--->>  0 .25 refunded

I never passed judgement on the GPL violation issue because I never looked at fubly's previous project(s) (but I've heard all about it from Kano.) All I was suggesting was that the S9 driver be ported to master cgminer and inherit the fixes that were put into the S1/2/3 drivers - diff up what changes went from S3 to S9 and work that way instead of porting the core cgminer code to their fork. The issue with bitmain's fork is both the core cgminer code and their driver. High CPU usage, throwing away shares, getting best share wrong, massive wasteful work queues that add to latencies are the things I recall off the top of my head. Unfortunately I don't have the time to do the driver myself so I would welcome anyone from the community doing it; don't think I'm singling out fubly.

As for not working on Kano's ckpool I don't think that's anything to do with fubly's code since he can mine on solo ckpool. His actions may have put him on an IP blacklist for kano.is in the past (which may say something in itself.)

I just refunded citronick

https://blockchain.info/tx/f9c58da41c21f90891c8aace09bfd91e1d2cc5526e5fcbae5c0633a29323951c


My intentions were to be helpful  and this has turned very sideways.

As I see this kano's pointof view  is fubly is actively in violation with the older posted git and this new cgminer is in violation due to hidden files

And my understanding of laws protecting software are too limited to be of value here.

Since I do not knowing aid in software violations I am refunding all escrow funds.

Xircom----------- please give me a refund address   .55 due
d57heinz--------- please give me a refund address  .25 due
darval ------------please give me a refund address  .25 due


citronick---------- >>  0.25  refunded
NotFuzzyWarm--->>  0 .25 refunded

Im pissed and uncomfortable as well Citronic  
I do understand and respect that the license has to be kept and we do not want any more hidden "bull" in any miner versions. Thats one of the reasons why KANO or -CK should go through the code and give it a green light.
I think Fably learned a lesson as I see it and tries to get rid of the shit he did with the other case Kano and him is discussing, so from my point of view, it is very childish whats going on.

I do understand Phillipma1957 is redrawing the Bounty BTC adress, but all this could be a good case if every body was willing to work together. I too did take the drastic way and moved my hardware away from KANO and it hurts BIG time....I do not accept if someone feels like they owe something or someone.
Still respect KANO and -CK a lot for the work they do, but putting bumps on the road for others is not the way.
Im very dissadpointed.
Citronic, send a PM if you want to point you farm to another reliable pool running CK software.

I would like to see a comment from KANO or -CK

I have refunded 0.25 btc to NotFuzzyWarm

https://blockchain.info/tx/f6663d133abab6108eefc2a774813d910d6f7ca495553d87e898624a0431d677


I hold refunds for


Xircom----------- please give me a refund address   .55 due
citronick---------- please give me a refund address  .25 due
d57heinz--------- please give me a refund address  .25 due
darval ------------please give me a refund address  .25 due



NotFuzzyWarm---please give me a refund address  .25 paid back today!

To the four listed above please post refund btc addy for me.

Dear philipma1957,

please make an end and refund the donators, please.

If anyone want to donate he can do it directly to this address: 16L45ub3SpHZ6dYbqseip7Fv4BEJSj9xEo

Every donator, will get a full qualified invoice because we have to pay taxes for every coin we get.

For this pm us your full address to send the invoice about your donation.

I think for the next bounty which will created for any work on cgminer core, we have to ask the developer team before
about all restriction and all what the bounty-developer has to do.

On this thread the work order was simple to understand. But now after all work is done, it looks like the game as I did on
cgminer 4.9.2 for S7.

Working hard, publish the code, send the binaries, send screenshots, send data form ssh screen aso....

What we all do here with bitcoin is writing history, I will be proud to show my children 2025 what we where talking about.
And what we all have done!

But posts with every line "Shit" "Fuck" "Porn" "Scam" "Drugs" and so on. I shame myself!!!!

Are you all blocked to? Like me, from kano pool?

Test it please on solo.kano.

Or test it on a 1:1 copy of ckpool - poolsoftware.

Or test it on mining-lottery.eu:3333

WARNING! Do not mine on my private closed pool!

Just put my pool on pool2 and check if your miner can connect? If you saw DEAD then the pool did not accept your mining client.

I have switched now my miner from slush to my own and closed mining pool (ckpool) and it works.





I don´t understand kano, really.

After Bitmain released S9 everyone was able to mine with stolen and hidden cgminer code by bitmain.
Now the source is open and no one can mine with this new version on kano.is.

I mean kano.is and not on ckpool-software, because I was running my own private closed pool based on the latest ckpool software.

I think now it time kano, to tell all people here that you are blocking hmm their IP´s or blocking the clients signature.

Please try to mine on solo. And you will see that ckpool software is able to let you mine!

if you want I will refund you and you can send directly to fubly

post me a refund btc addy.

I will be refunding NotFuzzyWarm  and I am awaiting   the other donators to check in here.

It seems Kano's position is Fubly is currently  in violation of cgminer and that this 'fix' for the s-9 is also in violation .

   I am not a lawyer so I am not qualified to make judgement on that, but I won't escrow funds that are going to be used  to pay for code that the author's of cgminer  do not approve of since I could be considered aiding the violation of cgminer.

Plus My position has always been  I send funds for a code that ck and kano approve of.

I do not know all the info behind the curtains on this.

But funds will be refunded to all 5 donors.  They can do as they please with funds.  Maybe they can ask ck and kano via pm for more info.

Has the dust settled on this case?

Can I use this new firmware on kano pool?

If cannot.... then WHY?

Would I be worried if this bounty gets stuck and new firmware not usable at kano pool?
The answer is YES. Guys, this is a serious matter.
My mining operations has a P&L and I am answerable to my investors and business partners.

FACTS:
0. bmminer 1.0 is shit and needs to be replaced
1. Bounty is real and fluby took the job.
2. Work has been done and final testing.
3. Published as per Github and GPL.
4. Almost all members here is not all, will be pointing to kano pool.

Whats the problem?

I am sorry if I am too direct, and may offend others, because I may not have all privy information.

But after reading the posts today, I am very upset and uncomfortable at a possible situation where this new code may not be usable in kano pool and forced to mine somewhere else.

Thank you   "A rock and A hard place"  = English version

And now?

Is it ok now? You where posting that before I was publishing the final source.

I understand my work by this way:

Make the work, send the binary to a tester, send the code to any other person, wait for a feedback, get the bounty.

If not how do you explain me this:

People who donates will be the ones to get the firmware for the S9`s first before firmware is published

For this I am right, and Kano = false, because that what he saw at date=1472769930 was a not fully published code!!!


Can any other confirm that the binary I published is the same as compiling the code.

Philipma1957 I respect that you do not want to stay between two chairs (ger. to eng.)

In order to proceed with this or any other venture in regards to the S9 I would agree that requirements need to be declared upfront on how we would measure success and qualification for payment.

Here are some items to consider for the requirements wishlist:

- Must be open source so that future changes or enhancements are possible from the community at large. No hidden or closed source code. I would not support a one time change in which we are locked with no options.

- Must be able to restore the S9 back to stock using the original code from Bitmain.

I would also propose that any member who contributes have the ability to vote yes or no to release their funds for payment. Also to consider and decide is this an all or none vote in regards to payment of reward. Should we consider the option of a partial payment under the appropriate conditions.

Yet to be determined is how will we evaluate the code to validate it meets our requirements. My ability closely matches that stated by philipma1957 and I do not have the skills or ability to effectively examine and / or validate code.

I think it is only fair to determine the requirements in advance and prior to accepting any potential submissions of code.

My two cents worth. Hopefully we can come up with something workable as we move forward, if that is possible at this point. I am still interested in improvements on the S9 and willing to contribute the funds I previously committed to this project.

Top 4 on a Google search:
http://www.asicboost.com
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/43579/how-does-asicboost-work
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1604/1604.00575.pdf

What is ASICBoost, I never heard from that!