Topic: Community Miner Design Discussion - page 3. (Read 34275 times)

When I hear "design by committee" the connotation for me is "a bunch of dudes sitting around talking for countless hours". There is no attempt at implementation, or no real teamwork going into it. Just a lot of time gets wasted. Committes debate while teams do.

"Design by team", now there's something I can get behind. Find two or three people, each with a general knowledge of everything and assigned a specific module and someone approximately in charge. Spend a bit of time discussing the problems, come up with a means of solving each problem and how the modules interact, then go do it. Which is sorta what aliashraf is trying to get across; the problem is nomenclature. In America it's pretty much understood that committees never actually accomplish anything, so if you're in the world of actually getting things done you BY NO MEANS want a committee involved unless you want everything to take ten times longer, cost ten times as much to develop, and probably end up sucking anyway.

Also, in reading this (or pretty much any technical) thread, my eyes glaze over and I skip any post that starts out loaded with management-speak.

Also, this is Kilo's thread about he and I designing a mining framework, thanks for that reminder. It's probably best if you keep the "let's leverage blockchain-hijacking protocols for something something automatic money something something it's the best" (like I said, I glaze over when management-speak happens) to the thread you started specifically on the subject. It has gone on long enough here, and when the owner of the thread asks you to leave it's polite to pay attention.

I am starting to think we are being trolled. It certainly feels like it.

SNR was good, before this new noise.

And voltage control stuff has already been moved to another thread by sidehack don't worry, you can always find a lot about how to adjust S7 under-clock and ... here and there , this is about 'community miner design discussion' and we are good, don't worry

I think this thread has been derailed to the point of being pointless now, the SNR has become unbearable already. Please, try to keep clutter down, and move whatever design proposal and/or musings about hardware design you have to another thread please.

It is labeled as community miner design discussion, and now you are reducing it to some voltage control tricks and saving some chips, I am not.
I am generalizing it as such a problem:

How can we manage for the sole purpose behind Bitcoin core consensus protocol: 'mining by a large decentralized community', to be fulfilled by designing and producing a series of 'community mining' hardware and solutions?

Generalization, according to my experience and knowledge  in most cases works better than reduction. and obviously with such a generalization the first definitive requirement is investment and the second is organization.

I don't give a shit to voltage adjustment stuff, I'm not that naive to be excited with a firmware playing with voltage level of a damn Bitmain sx.

I'm seriously concerned about a total solution to the most basic crisis of the community, right now, in the right, practical way.

Just forget about 'saving some chips' , It is about saving the whole chips, Bitcoin chips, it is what a 'community miner' is about, not an epsilon less than that, get yourself together,

If you return to the OP's, as we all should from time to time, you will find that this project is all about securing some chips, designing an efficient, flexible and cost effective Power and Control solution. Then making this available to the Community at a reasonable price.

I still fail to see how any of you collection of superficially impressive words adds to this?


Rich

I have got to say garbage can be recycled and useful unlike your words that are to be labeled definitively as poison. say something meaningful our just watch and observe how civilized people discuss critical problems like this.

I have got to say that it's verbal garbage like this that sums up why Sidehack & Kilo17 should just get on with it... 

Rich

Acquisitions of scam and conspiracy are among most important concerns of you and can be easily managed with a protocol backed by the Blockchain.

I am trying to deploy a semi-autonomous distributed organization with special interests in supporting community miner hardware design and implementation as it is aligned with long term objectives of the most likely founders and members of it.
It is not about a fake company or a cone man accepting pre-orders for some fictional product.
It is about kicking such a cone scenario out for ever by having discipline and semi-smart contracts and at the same time it is about leveraging resources needed for a real world large scale project which deserves to be labeled as a 'community miner project.

The community is large enough to be behaved with caution and readiness.

Yes it is just by you. I hate bureaucracy since 80's, I have enough reasons and evident for this and do not need more.

Teamwork and management is not bureaucracy, it is about collaboration and respect and about remaining focused and oriented.

I personally need a lot of help from mates to remain focused and can afford a lot of help to keep people focused too.

I do not disagree with you but we are not looking to end "the crisis".  Maybe this will help you understand at least my position on this.

Sidehack and I have discussed building a miner for 8-10 months now.  I was going to have special mining boards made for a "Home Immersion Cooling" experiment.  It was a quite experiment and only 2-3 people knew about it. 

I have since moved on with those plans and have redirected my energy into this project.  The most important key point that I think you have missed is this- It is going to be close to 100% funded by me.  That is important for more than a few reasons.  First, it has ZERO chance of being a scam.  You are fairly new to this community but there is a long history of miners being paid for in advance and then those people getting screwed over.  Secondly, we have not and will not be accepting outside money, mostly for the same reasons and also to leave the final decisions in only a few hands as to minimize disruptions or diversion of the ultimate goal.

If you want to fund or kickstart a miner then I think it is great and I would probably buy some completed miners.  If you are looking for a bunch of people to kick in cash for a preproduction miner - it will never happen.

This is an open discussion about a miner that I labeled "Community Miner" because it is being built for the community and by community members.  Nothing more and nothing less.

When you say, "design-by-committee", I do not hear "teamwork". Now, it may just be me, but what I hear is, "bureaucrats tying down the engineering team with endless demands of pie-in-the-sky bullshit that is only good for one thing, the bureaucrats pockets."

In the real world! A product is designed by a team , is produced by a team, is tested by a team, is sold by a team ... people work together to make things happen ...

I have been a freelance independent programmer for so many years but when it comes to do serious work, I gather a handful of best fellas and share everything with them, including my core ideas about the job, I expose everything to their critics and suggestions and change a lot of my initial designs, everybody is happy, teammates feel respect and become more motivated and responsive, the customer is satisfied and I have learned a lot and I make profits. I keep the 'last word' right though which I use it rarely and politely ... it is team work and it is design-by-team and a committee is nothing less or more than a team.

'common people' are a lot dear Mr. Kilo,
I agree neither you nor sidehack has ever talked about addressing Bitcoin centralization threat but it is the direct consequence of having 'ordinary people' being able to mine ... just think about it: hundreds of thousands of people having 1-10 Th/s machines mining, it is almost a quarter or more of the total hash power and  definitively it will put an end to the crisis.

Also I think the need for a 'community miner' is a consequence of the crisis itself. Bitcoin by definition is about community mining it is the most basic principle of everything about Bitcoin.
When ASIC came into the scene and Chinese began to establish their multi ph/s farms, playing the role of a miner and a mining hardware seller at the same time, community mining became obsolete, Bitcoin was put in the danger and kilo117 started his thread about the need for a community miner ... it is the real history of this thread.

Aliashraf,
I think you are missing the point still, the objective of this community miner is not to compete with industrial scale production, it is not to make a profit, it is not to change the face of Bitcoin or the direction it is going.  I think this project is a simple plan to produce a miner that common people that love Bitcoin can purchase, mine with and enjoy.

It is also a place to listen to what the little guys want and to respond.

I can appreciate what you want to do but for me the sense of accomplishment when it does get produced will be a reward in itself.  Maybe the miner will make it onto the Wiki history of miners or one of those comparison sites or maybe no one will want any part of it and a few of us end up with a stockpile that will not sell.  Regardless of the outcome, I can say "I tried" and I didn't act like a sellout.

I was not using the word fallacy as a synonym for lie. I am accusing you of arguing based on a logical fallacy and you are doing it again. It is also very misleading of you to put quotes around words that you never actually said.

In what world does "teamwork" imply "design-by-committee"?

I would address this, but it actually makes no sense.

Actually, I started another thread because the subject of that thread wasn't really designing a community miner. It was designing a miner, but separate from this project and I was requesting a bit of advice and discussion from the old salt engineers who have been building stuff since before I was born. That job will probably indirectly apply to this one more or less as an enabler (via resources) but it's not the same project by any means so shouldn't be handled in the same thread.

Stating that 'having teamwork while preserving senior designer's rights to lead the project is great'  is a fallacy? since when? It is a fact, real world jobs are done quite well this way and right now, almost every thing you are using is prouced this way, including the keyboard you misuse to type b* with

This was almost a dead thread when I put forward the problems like financing (thus managing as a consequence, yes?) this project. Sidehack  started another thread and shifted most of the 'brainstorming about physical hardware configurations' there and left us with the actual problem:
dealing with 'community miner' not as a habitual brain storming project but as a high priority mission for keeping Bitcoin decentralized.

I am trying to convince people that as a real world design/manufacture/distribute problem it needs institution and as a Bitcoin problem it can be supported by the Blockchain itself when it comes to trust, investment, management, etc.

Oh, I read your whole statement. However, you are stating an opinion as fact. Your statement may even qualify as a fallacy of the type "begging the question."