Love your fuddwareTM. FYI... I installed 2.1c and it's telling me there's an update available.
Yeah... I’m not actually checking the version server side currently and just showing that message. I’ll figure out a way to hide it soon.
Jason
Topic: Efudd Z-Series Fuddware 2.3 -Z11/Z11e/Z11j/Z9/Mini - page 24. (Read 45527 times)
Yeah... I’m not actually checking the version server side currently and just showing that message. I’ll figure out a way to hide it soon.
Jason
Love your fuddwareTM. FYI... I installed 2.1c and it's telling me there's an update available.
https://ibb.co/8gDzY4B
https://ibb.co/8gDzY4B
Folk,
At this point in time, I think I am caught up with license requests. If I have missed you, please PM me again.
Thank you,
Jason
At this point in time, I think I am caught up with license requests. If I have missed you, please PM me again.
Thank you,
Jason
Folk,
I am going to resume selling licenses to disable the dev fee. If you are interested, PM me with the number of machines you want a license for of each type. I will respond with additional details on how to proceed.
Thank you,
Jason
I am going to resume selling licenses to disable the dev fee. If you are interested, PM me with the number of machines you want a license for of each type. I will respond with additional details on how to proceed.
Thank you,
Jason
<>
*EDIT* The winner has collected the prize for week 1 / 1 ZEC price. The winner was a user from the Cursed Mining discord #asicmining chat running the Z9 firmware. I've asked the user if they mind I post their username -- if they agree, I'll update this post.
Jason
*EDIT* The winner has collected the prize for week 1 / 1 ZEC price. The winner was a user from the Cursed Mining discord #asicmining chat running the Z9 firmware. I've asked the user if they mind I post their username -- if they agree, I'll update this post.
Jason
It wasn't me, sigh.
Lol... there is always the PS4!
-j
<>
*EDIT* The winner has collected the prize for week 1 / 1 ZEC price. The winner was a user from the Cursed Mining discord #asicmining chat running the Z9 firmware. I've asked the user if they mind I post their username -- if they agree, I'll update this post.
Jason
*EDIT* The winner has collected the prize for week 1 / 1 ZEC price. The winner was a user from the Cursed Mining discord #asicmining chat running the Z9 firmware. I've asked the user if they mind I post their username -- if they agree, I'll update this post.
Jason
It wasn't me, sigh.
Folk,
The ZEC prize for week 1 (12/01 through 12/07 GMT time) has been selected. The winner's dashboard will be updated letting them know they have won and will be instructed to screenshot it and email it to me. If the prize is not claimed in 48 hours, I will select another random system and repeat this process until it is claimed.
There were a total of 1,767 entrants.
The breakdown is as follows:
176 systems participated 7 days = 1232
24 systems participated 6 days = 144
31 systems participated 5 days = 155
26 systems participated 4 days = 104
16 systems participated 3 days = 48
26 systems participated 2 days = 52
32 systems participated 1 day = 32
For each system, a single entry was added to a file, one line per day.
This file was randomly shuffled.
To get a real random number, I requested for a number between 1 and 2000 across 3 different services: 2 IRC servers and 1 Discord server.
The numbers selected by those who responded were: 679, 1337, and 716.
These were totaled and divided by 2 to determine the winner or (679+1337+716)/2 = 1366.
Please check your system dashboard after the next dev cycle to see if you are the winner.
Thank you for participating and I will likely use this same methodology for the PS4 bundle selection after 12/24.
*EDIT* The winner has collected the prize for week 1 / 1 ZEC price. The winner was a user from the Cursed Mining discord #asicmining chat running the Z9 firmware. I've asked the user if they mind I post their username -- if they agree, I'll update this post.
Jason
The ZEC prize for week 1 (12/01 through 12/07 GMT time) has been selected. The winner's dashboard will be updated letting them know they have won and will be instructed to screenshot it and email it to me. If the prize is not claimed in 48 hours, I will select another random system and repeat this process until it is claimed.
There were a total of 1,767 entrants.
The breakdown is as follows:
176 systems participated 7 days = 1232
24 systems participated 6 days = 144
31 systems participated 5 days = 155
26 systems participated 4 days = 104
16 systems participated 3 days = 48
26 systems participated 2 days = 52
32 systems participated 1 day = 32
For each system, a single entry was added to a file, one line per day.
This file was randomly shuffled.
To get a real random number, I requested for a number between 1 and 2000 across 3 different services: 2 IRC servers and 1 Discord server.
The numbers selected by those who responded were: 679, 1337, and 716.
These were totaled and divided by 2 to determine the winner or (679+1337+716)/2 = 1366.
Please check your system dashboard after the next dev cycle to see if you are the winner.
Thank you for participating and I will likely use this same methodology for the PS4 bundle selection after 12/24.
*EDIT* The winner has collected the prize for week 1 / 1 ZEC price. The winner was a user from the Cursed Mining discord #asicmining chat running the Z9 firmware. I've asked the user if they mind I post their username -- if they agree, I'll update this post.
Jason
Efudd I sent a PM with support ID and logs, maybe you can help me figure this out.
Ok, thank you. I’m responding from my phone at the moment, but will look into it as soon as I can. I Can quickly address one of your questions at least. In the post at the top of the thread, which I admit is noisy and needs to be cleaned up, I have said that at this point in time I am not selling new licenses but that I would update the post if that changed in the future.
I will dig through the information you provided as soon as I can today.
*EDIT*: dtawom - I've sent you a PM with some follow-up comments and provided you my email address to reach me in case you hit PM limits on the forums.
Jason
Efudd I sent a PM with support ID and logs, maybe you can help me figure this out.
Now that I'm back to a real keyboard instead of responding to chipless noise from my phone, here is what is collected:
=====> In use: 2 of 2 licenses <=====
<=== REQ: 26XXXXXXXXXXX1ea4d (1544162907) 7 REGULAR b8XXXXXX3725a
===> RES: 26XXXXXXXXXXXXea4d (1544162908) 8 REGULAR
That's a sample from a previous paid user, who's miner sent in a status check, it's 7th communication (1 count each way) and tells the server it is in regular mode. The server uses that information, along with the users's license information, to respond ("===> RES:" line) and say "Ok, stay regular."
The only difference for dev-fee is the transition is from "REGULAR" to dev-fee and then from dev-fee to "REGULAR". The other information that is passed includes the time to mine for dev at, which is _hard coded_ at 600 seconds (10 minutes).
Otherwise, an optional message is sent back to the miner which can be displayed in the "Summary" page of the web interface (This is how the winner of the contests will be alerted).
On the very first connection, frequencies of boards are also sent back for statistical purposes and ultimately to "tune" the auto tuning function, a very crude summary of that data for the minis is included below:
As far as my design philosophy goes, it was "enable features, protect the work". As such, I made a hard but conscious decision to require authorization to function. Can't reach the server? Won't work for you, sorry. I had some Russian customers with that issue, so I spun up a server that worked for Russia -- problem fixed. The exception to this philosophy is paid users -- still requires authorization to start up, can run longer without a recheck. My design also allows for other options at scale (deployments of 1000+ systems for a single farm) which are not currently in use.
Can I expire firmware? Yes.
Can I revoke licenses? Yes.
Can I disable a system? Yes.
All of that is simply an artifact of requiring authorization. Nothing nefarious.
Why did I go through this trouble? A couple of users and organizations decided to take advantage of my trust. One sold my firmware on ebay as their own, another purchased a paid license for 1 system and then ran it on 1000+. How do I know this? Someone tried to claim the referral fee for the 1000+ nodes but there were not any purchases anywhere even near that number. I've since had two large organizations approach me for custom firmware work, only to run off with it since I didn't lock it down.
Did I make efforts to prevent tampering? Yes.
Did I make efforts to prevent someone else from taking over the whole authorization system and "stealing" everyone's miners? Yes (That's part of why functionality is greatly limited in terms of control, Chip -- I didn't want someone else to be able to do something nefarious because of a mistake I might have made).
What did I use to do this? I've been blessed with an excellent career and opportunities over the years to work with anything from circuit level design to architectures and deployments at global scale. I'm a number guys. I work with systems, math, statistics and more.
As far as what I'm making, spin it however you want, but I wish your math was correct. I'm giving away through these contests a fairly large portion of what I'm bringing in, to be honest. Also, the dev pools aren't hidden, so you can flat out see what I'm "bringing in" by simply looking.
So, yeah... nothing to hide there, Chip. Ball is in your court to throw the next accusation; join the discord, say hello! You could see exactly how much I do share (it's a lot more than you assume) instead of flinging poo.
Jason
=====> In use: 2 of 2 licenses <=====
<=== REQ: 26XXXXXXXXXXX1ea4d (1544162907) 7 REGULAR b8XXXXXX3725a
===> RES: 26XXXXXXXXXXXXea4d (1544162908) 8 REGULAR
That's a sample from a previous paid user, who's miner sent in a status check, it's 7th communication (1 count each way) and tells the server it is in regular mode. The server uses that information, along with the users's license information, to respond ("===> RES:" line) and say "Ok, stay regular."
The only difference for dev-fee is the transition is from "REGULAR" to dev-fee and then from dev-fee to "REGULAR". The other information that is passed includes the time to mine for dev at, which is _hard coded_ at 600 seconds (10 minutes).
Otherwise, an optional message is sent back to the miner which can be displayed in the "Summary" page of the web interface (This is how the winner of the contests will be alerted).
On the very first connection, frequencies of boards are also sent back for statistical purposes and ultimately to "tune" the auto tuning function, a very crude summary of that data for the minis is included below:
Code:
Z9 Mini Average Frequencies:
Global: 660, Min 500, Max 850
Board 1: 668, Min 550, Max 787
Board 2: 668, Min 500, Max 793
Board 3: 672, Min 462, Max 787
As far as my design philosophy goes, it was "enable features, protect the work". As such, I made a hard but conscious decision to require authorization to function. Can't reach the server? Won't work for you, sorry. I had some Russian customers with that issue, so I spun up a server that worked for Russia -- problem fixed. The exception to this philosophy is paid users -- still requires authorization to start up, can run longer without a recheck. My design also allows for other options at scale (deployments of 1000+ systems for a single farm) which are not currently in use.
Can I expire firmware? Yes.
Can I revoke licenses? Yes.
Can I disable a system? Yes.
All of that is simply an artifact of requiring authorization. Nothing nefarious.
Why did I go through this trouble? A couple of users and organizations decided to take advantage of my trust. One sold my firmware on ebay as their own, another purchased a paid license for 1 system and then ran it on 1000+. How do I know this? Someone tried to claim the referral fee for the 1000+ nodes but there were not any purchases anywhere even near that number. I've since had two large organizations approach me for custom firmware work, only to run off with it since I didn't lock it down.
Did I make efforts to prevent tampering? Yes.
Did I make efforts to prevent someone else from taking over the whole authorization system and "stealing" everyone's miners? Yes (That's part of why functionality is greatly limited in terms of control, Chip -- I didn't want someone else to be able to do something nefarious because of a mistake I might have made).
What did I use to do this? I've been blessed with an excellent career and opportunities over the years to work with anything from circuit level design to architectures and deployments at global scale. I'm a number guys. I work with systems, math, statistics and more.
As far as what I'm making, spin it however you want, but I wish your math was correct. I'm giving away through these contests a fairly large portion of what I'm bringing in, to be honest. Also, the dev pools aren't hidden, so you can flat out see what I'm "bringing in" by simply looking.
So, yeah... nothing to hide there, Chip. Ball is in your court to throw the next accusation; join the discord, say hello! You could see exactly how much I do share (it's a lot more than you assume) instead of flinging poo.
Jason
LOL, no flinging poo on you, only out to get some answers you never told your users, such as the ability to shut them down, the ability to expire a firmware and failing to connect to your api can stop their miner. Knowing this some may not want to use your firmware and it should have been disclosed from the beginning by you about those capabilities. Was no accusation's thrown sorry only questions. An accusation would be if I would have said you were ripping your users off and I never said that.
Now that I'm back to a real keyboard instead of responding to chipless noise from my phone, here is what is collected:
=====> In use: 2 of 2 licenses <=====
<=== REQ: 26XXXXXXXXXXX1ea4d (1544162907) 7 REGULAR b8XXXXXX3725a
===> RES: 26XXXXXXXXXXXXea4d (1544162908) 8 REGULAR
That's a sample from a previous paid user, who's miner sent in a status check, it's 7th communication (1 count each way) and tells the server it is in regular mode. The server uses that information, along with the users's license information, to respond ("===> RES:" line) and say "Ok, stay regular."
The only difference for dev-fee is the transition is from "REGULAR" to dev-fee and then from dev-fee to "REGULAR". The other information that is passed includes the time to mine for dev at, which is _hard coded_ at 600 seconds (10 minutes).
Otherwise, an optional message is sent back to the miner which can be displayed in the "Summary" page of the web interface (This is how the winner of the contests will be alerted).
On the very first connection, frequencies of boards are also sent back for statistical purposes and ultimately to "tune" the auto tuning function, a very crude summary of that data for the minis is included below:
As far as my design philosophy goes, it was "enable features, protect the work". As such, I made a hard but conscious decision to require authorization to function. Can't reach the server? Won't work for you, sorry. I had some Russian customers with that issue, so I spun up a server that worked for Russia -- problem fixed. The exception to this philosophy is paid users -- still requires authorization to start up, can run longer without a recheck. My design also allows for other options at scale (deployments of 1000+ systems for a single farm) which are not currently in use.
Can I expire firmware? Yes.
Can I revoke licenses? Yes.
Can I disable a system? Yes.
All of that is simply an artifact of requiring authorization. Nothing nefarious.
Why did I go through this trouble? A couple of users and organizations decided to take advantage of my trust. One sold my firmware on ebay as their own, another purchased a paid license for 1 system and then ran it on 1000+. How do I know this? Someone tried to claim the referral fee for the 1000+ nodes but there were not any purchases anywhere even near that number. I've since had two large organizations approach me for custom firmware work, only to run off with it since I didn't lock it down.
Did I make efforts to prevent tampering? Yes.
Did I make efforts to prevent someone else from taking over the whole authorization system and "stealing" everyone's miners? Yes (That's part of why functionality is greatly limited in terms of control, Chip -- I didn't want someone else to be able to do something nefarious because of a mistake I might have made).
What did I use to do this? I've been blessed with an excellent career and opportunities over the years to work with anything from circuit level design to architectures and deployments at global scale. I'm a number guys. I work with systems, math, statistics and more.
As far as what I'm making, spin it however you want, but I wish your math was correct. I'm giving away through these contests a fairly large portion of what I'm bringing in, to be honest. Also, the dev pools aren't hidden, so you can flat out see what I'm "bringing in" by simply looking.
So, yeah... nothing to hide there, Chip. Ball is in your court to throw the next accusation; join the discord, say hello! You could see exactly how much I do share (it's a lot more than you assume) instead of flinging poo.
Jason
=====> In use: 2 of 2 licenses <=====
<=== REQ: 26XXXXXXXXXXX1ea4d (1544162907) 7 REGULAR b8XXXXXX3725a
===> RES: 26XXXXXXXXXXXXea4d (1544162908) 8 REGULAR
That's a sample from a previous paid user, who's miner sent in a status check, it's 7th communication (1 count each way) and tells the server it is in regular mode. The server uses that information, along with the users's license information, to respond ("===> RES:" line) and say "Ok, stay regular."
The only difference for dev-fee is the transition is from "REGULAR" to dev-fee and then from dev-fee to "REGULAR". The other information that is passed includes the time to mine for dev at, which is _hard coded_ at 600 seconds (10 minutes).
Otherwise, an optional message is sent back to the miner which can be displayed in the "Summary" page of the web interface (This is how the winner of the contests will be alerted).
On the very first connection, frequencies of boards are also sent back for statistical purposes and ultimately to "tune" the auto tuning function, a very crude summary of that data for the minis is included below:
Code:
Z9 Mini Average Frequencies:
Global: 660, Min 500, Max 850
Board 1: 668, Min 550, Max 787
Board 2: 668, Min 500, Max 793
Board 3: 672, Min 462, Max 787
As far as my design philosophy goes, it was "enable features, protect the work". As such, I made a hard but conscious decision to require authorization to function. Can't reach the server? Won't work for you, sorry. I had some Russian customers with that issue, so I spun up a server that worked for Russia -- problem fixed. The exception to this philosophy is paid users -- still requires authorization to start up, can run longer without a recheck. My design also allows for other options at scale (deployments of 1000+ systems for a single farm) which are not currently in use.
Can I expire firmware? Yes.
Can I revoke licenses? Yes.
Can I disable a system? Yes.
All of that is simply an artifact of requiring authorization. Nothing nefarious.
Why did I go through this trouble? A couple of users and organizations decided to take advantage of my trust. One sold my firmware on ebay as their own, another purchased a paid license for 1 system and then ran it on 1000+. How do I know this? Someone tried to claim the referral fee for the 1000+ nodes but there were not any purchases anywhere even near that number. I've since had two large organizations approach me for custom firmware work, only to run off with it since I didn't lock it down.
Did I make efforts to prevent tampering? Yes.
Did I make efforts to prevent someone else from taking over the whole authorization system and "stealing" everyone's miners? Yes (That's part of why functionality is greatly limited in terms of control, Chip -- I didn't want someone else to be able to do something nefarious because of a mistake I might have made).
What did I use to do this? I've been blessed with an excellent career and opportunities over the years to work with anything from circuit level design to architectures and deployments at global scale. I'm a number guys. I work with systems, math, statistics and more.
As far as what I'm making, spin it however you want, but I wish your math was correct. I'm giving away through these contests a fairly large portion of what I'm bringing in, to be honest. Also, the dev pools aren't hidden, so you can flat out see what I'm "bringing in" by simply looking.
So, yeah... nothing to hide there, Chip. Ball is in your court to throw the next accusation; join the discord, say hello! You could see exactly how much I do share (it's a lot more than you assume) instead of flinging poo.
Jason
i2c is on the sys/bus but not on the /dev. The VRM is the cause of the low performance for sure
agreed. not exposed to the OS directly.
they are using "tricks" instead.
Jason
...snip...
So harassing you is asking you legitimate questions about your firmware? Take my questions as you wish, I have not accused you of any wrong doing and have only asked you questions that deserve an answer. As I said gpu software coders have been caught ripping off the miners thru their software and with the few people asking about the dev fee running at odd times or whatever it is a concern for miners using your firmware as to what control you may have over their machine. A simple answer would have been to say "none other then dev-mode" but again since you can even answer that one questions says a lot about your character. You can show whatever log you want your in control of them.
Don't worry I wont use your firmware after your fees and server fees I lose daily profit because the speed increase all gets taken in fees. Hopefully others better luck using your firmware.
So harassing you is asking you legitimate questions about your firmware? Take my questions as you wish, I have not accused you of any wrong doing and have only asked you questions that deserve an answer. As I said gpu software coders have been caught ripping off the miners thru their software and with the few people asking about the dev fee running at odd times or whatever it is a concern for miners using your firmware as to what control you may have over their machine. A simple answer would have been to say "none other then dev-mode" but again since you can even answer that one questions says a lot about your character. You can show whatever log you want your in control of them.
Don't worry I wont use your firmware after your fees and server fees I lose daily profit because the speed increase all gets taken in fees. Hopefully others better luck using your firmware.
I am sorry you have had bad experiences with others. As far as my character goes, that’s easy; sinful imperfect man, saved by Grace but Blessed to be alive.
I don’t have control over these miners. If the server cannot be reached, in most cases yes, it will fail to start and that is a purposeful design decision. I know if I make a mistake in availability I will lose confidence of my customers and they would uninstall.
I sure hope I got the design right and distributed it properly around the globe, and I hope my failover/ha components work right (they do, so far).
Jason
Jason
I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….
How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?
If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?
You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.
What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.
We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.
What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?
Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair, I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.
I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….
How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?
If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?
You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.
What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.
We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.
What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?
Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair, I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.
Chipless, thank you for voicing your concerns. Please use your own firmware and not mine. If you would like to buy a license, the price is one beeeelioon dollars. Special, just for you. Also, all other firmware features are designed to spy on your toaster. Not everyone else’s, just yours.
The rest of your math is just wrong, again, by a lot.
Jason
Since you fail to answer the questions I will take it as you have something to hide. As I said to you before I have been up and down this road with gpu mining software the coders not willing to answer legitimate questions. The math ain't wrong my miners make about 3.50 an hour therefore if you add up the dev fees for almost an hour it adds up to a lot of dev fees collected if you have a large number of users.
Quit being a baby about me releasing a fix for the batch 4 minis fan and temp problem when using batch 1 firmware. I guess you have to ride your train while you can because yours wont be the only one available forever others will come out with releases with the same features as yours.
You don't seem to like anyone who calls you out on some topics of your firmware.
Take it however you want, I don’t care. If you are making 3.50 an hour with mining, you make more than I do.
I have already answered some of your questions previous times you have asked. I am not going to tell you how my stuff works. Use it or don’t. Since you have never shared a supportID you have not had the pleasure of me sharing what is logged. Those who I have had to support have seen the raw logs where appropriate so your accusations of impropriety are unfounded, and as usual with your statements, just wrong.
Please keep harassing me, I enjoy it.
Jason
So harassing you is asking you legitimate questions about your firmware? Take my questions as you wish, I have not accused you of any wrong doing and have only asked you questions that deserve an answer. As I said gpu software coders have been caught ripping off the miners thru their software and with the few people asking about the dev fee running at odd times or whatever it is a concern for miners using your firmware as to what control you may have over their machine. A simple answer would have been to say "none other then dev-mode" but again since you can even answer that one questions says a lot about your character. You can show whatever log you want your in control of them.
Don't worry I wont use your firmware after your fees and server fees I lose daily profit because the speed increase all gets taken in fees. Hopefully others better luck using your firmware.
...snip...
Since you fail to answer the questions I will take it as you have something to hide. As I said to you before I have been up and down this road with gpu mining software the coders not willing to answer legitimate questions. The math ain't wrong my miners make about 3.50 an hour therefore if you add up the dev fees for almost an hour it adds up to a lot of dev fees collected if you have a large number of users.
Quit being a baby about me releasing a fix for the batch 4 minis fan and temp problem when using batch 1 firmware. I guess you have to ride your train while you can because yours wont be the only one available forever others will come out with releases with the same features as yours.
You don't seem to like anyone who calls you out on some topics of your firmware.
Since you fail to answer the questions I will take it as you have something to hide. As I said to you before I have been up and down this road with gpu mining software the coders not willing to answer legitimate questions. The math ain't wrong my miners make about 3.50 an hour therefore if you add up the dev fees for almost an hour it adds up to a lot of dev fees collected if you have a large number of users.
Quit being a baby about me releasing a fix for the batch 4 minis fan and temp problem when using batch 1 firmware. I guess you have to ride your train while you can because yours wont be the only one available forever others will come out with releases with the same features as yours.
You don't seem to like anyone who calls you out on some topics of your firmware.
Take it however you want, I don’t care. If you are making 3.50 an hour with mining, you make more than I do.
I have already answered some of your questions previous times you have asked. I am not going to tell you how my stuff works. Use it or don’t. Since you have never shared a supportID you have not had the pleasure of me sharing what is logged. Those who I have had to support have seen the raw logs where appropriate so your accusations of impropriety are unfounded, and as usual with your statements, just wrong.
Please keep harassing me, I enjoy it.
Jason
Jason
I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….
How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?
If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?
You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.
What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.
We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.
What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?
Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair, I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.
I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….
How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?
If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?
You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.
What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.
We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.
What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?
Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair, I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.
Chipless, thank you for voicing your concerns. Please use your own firmware and not mine. If you would like to buy a license, the price is one beeeelioon dollars. Special, just for you. Also, all other firmware features are designed to spy on your toaster. Not everyone else’s, just yours.
The rest of your math is just wrong, again, by a lot.
Jason
Since you fail to answer the questions I will take it as you have something to hide. As I said to you before I have been up and down this road with gpu mining software the coders not willing to answer legitimate questions. The math ain't wrong my miners make about 3.50 an hour therefore if you add up the dev fees for almost an hour it adds up to a lot of dev fees collected if you have a large number of users.
Quit being a baby about me releasing a fix for the batch 4 minis fan and temp problem when using batch 1 firmware. I guess you have to ride your train while you can because yours wont be the only one available forever others will come out with releases with the same features as yours.
You don't seem to like anyone who calls you out on some topics of your firmware.
i2c is on the sys/bus but not on the /dev. The VRM is the cause of the low performance for sure
Have you converted jstefanop voltage regulator to z9? I looked at the driver and is not the sam (I also don't have ARM gear to compile the code)
Nope, I have not.
Have you converted jstefanop voltage regulator to z9? I looked at the driver and is not the sam (I also don't have ARM gear to compile the code)
For the record, 10 minutes dev and 280 minutes normal is 3.4%, not 1%. I never claimed 1%. I’m just getting home now and will look to investigate this shortly. It is 49.6 minutes a day.
Iceman, if you can PM me your supportID it would be great also. What 2.1c primarily changes is simply to ensure that it returns to the proper pool after the dev-fee. There were circumstances where it could return to one of your other pools instead. It was literally a one line change for that since I had some logic reversed accidentally.
Nothing else was changed that would match what you are seeing, for what it is is worth.
-jason
and I never said you did - I actually wasn't even paying attention to what it was supposed to be I just simply noticed the oddities on the z-farm and started looking into whats going on. When I mentioned 1% I simply wanted to say that I am not accusing you in dishonesty - my apologies if that didn't come out right. So..... like I mentioned in my post I set 5 big ones and 5 small ones on 2.1c to run on equihash overnight- disabled all custom scripts, rules etc. on awesome miner side. The only one I left running was a script that checks the pool after disconnect and if it is not correct one it switches it via SSH. I choose equihash just for the reason that it is the most screwy one with a lot of disconnects and rejects. The dev fee came out to be 4.11% Looking through some of the logs I can see that a few times miners got socket error and when reconcted they came to the pool that is specified in the first row of the set up thats is the reason you see a few other pools beside nicehash. One thing I can say for sure that the issue with not returning to the last pool mined on after dev cycle is definitely fixed and it doesn't matter if last pool was switched to using SSH command or it was just a default set up. Now it works the way it should. I will set the same bunch to run 24 hours on the luckpool mining hash this time - that should be much more stable compare to nicehash and will post results again tomorrow. I know you guys talked about temps and hash rate so here are a few graphs (2 big ones and 2 small ones on 2.1.c) that displays hash rate vs temperature. If anyone is interested i can post a larger sample which will have less spikes and easier to see correlation between two.Is “usage” there based on time or shares submitted? Also, are you using Nicehash and Z units? If so, that will be a significant waste of your shares. I’m on my mobile and don’t really want to try to type up the explanation on the small keyboard.
Also, can you please provide a support Id and your logs so I can understand these socket errors? (Hey chip, see how I keep asking for logs? Hint, I don’t have them).
Jason
Jump to: