Topic: Mining Farm Software Comparison (Read 571 times)

Kano,

I think most of the folks running higher end miners don't use custom ASIC code given that it violates warranty, etc.  Feels like custom ASIC code is a way to extend the useful life of an old miner and try to make it worth running at a profit.

I use Mineitor as a farm management system to query my stock rigs and give me performance history, temp, etc.  So honestly I am not violating anything. 

I do wish the old inefficient miners would just die and force folks to buy the newer, highly efficient miners (lowest joule / hash ratio).

Its like trying to keep that old v8 Plymouth going.  Let it die, buy something more fuel efficient.  The ecosystem is not in that much desperate need of those Th.

NONE. Read the post pinned to the top of the Mining area for why
Mainly point-3:
The software you mentioned are all for mining altcoins - not Bitcoin and as such are off-topic for this area of the Forum.

What is the best mining software? I heard about some mining software like kryptex, BeMine, ECOS, Shamining.. so what do you recommend for BTC mining?

They violate my license.
Of course I point that out.

Dude - copy/pasting snippets from articles without links to the source is PLAGERISM. That will quickly lead to being banned.
Even worse - that is very old information mentioning GPU which are useless for mining Bitcoin.

Bro you are that guy? tbh so annoying. I noticed this message on other threads. Learn to debug their firmware and find out for yourself if they are doing anything bad and stfu. your messages don't help anything or anyone. 

Just want to mention I either cant find the source code for following brands.
Ebang
Whatsminer
InnoSilicon
Cheetah Miner
Dragon Mint
Bitfily
Todek
PandaMiner
​Baikal
StrongU   
Lovecore
Goldshell
,...

So you earlier mentioned that every distribution should publish source code! only specific version of s9 which I believe it is too old is ok?!
What about other models?
If a custom firmware developer releases a source code from an old version which is impossible to find if it is the correct one, you will be satisfied?
I can't get it, why it is important to not replace a firmware with another one with the same condition which works better that stock one?
Why should anybody care about license since the big companies already ignore it and you as one of the developers accepted the situation?
What I see here is that you are only making excuses.

I totally agree with mikeywith, you are cherry-picking who to "fight".

Though I guess we are now getting to 4th or 5th or 6th ...

Edit: and I'm not gonna go look for that post for you - you go find it - you forgot it.
I'm not a forum index for you.
Though I may have posted about it twice, not just once.

Then you should only allow S9s to mine to your pool because I can't find the source code for S11, T11, S15, all of the 17 and 19 series, if publishing a single version gives them the permission to not publish the rest, all these custom firmware devs can just publish one version for a given miner and keep the rest.

Give up Kano, Bitmain gears with the stock firmware do violate the GPLv3 license in the same manner that all of these custom devs do and yet you are fine with allowing them to use your pool, it's just easier to deny that than having to admit that you are cherry-picking who to "fight".  

False.

Even the Bitmain S9 source for their modified cgminer is available online.
Just every aftermarket firmware (other than bos) likes to imagine that they can make minor changes to the code and keep those changes to themselves.
Bunch of scammers, to which I'd add you to the list, since you are continually trying to tell me why you should be allowed to violate the license, and that you do violate the license.

Alas it's not.
Never had an agreement in any way related to allowing anyone to violate the license, and never said I did.
... and I don't have the full rights to cgminer to ever do that anyway - it's written by a bunch of people, with 3 main developers, and with each added driver, a developer who's done most of the work on it (often from those 3)

The most recent addition there is of course vh, who does the gekko driver development with his changes on his public git.

... and it's fun to add how not doing this can cause problems:
Look at the Apollo miner where they've written or got a closed source miner from somewhere else, and people asking in their thread how to deal with various problems with it (since it's clearly not well debugged) and all that happens is ... they have to wait for one person to answer since no one else can see the source code and work out what's going on ... fun

Odds are Kano will be piping in eventually but suing Bitmain in China back then was a non-starter. He did do some work for them regarding the S1 but shelved it after BM refused to address the terrible performance of their FPGA driver. Beyond that, for a time both he and -ck did bug BM enough that as they released new miners Bitmain eventually (several months after release) *would* publish their source code for miners up to the early S9's.

I might add that Kano does have better performing versions of firmware for the S1 & S3's on his dl site. Also of course has the full source code for them there as well.

Yes, Braiins is 'Kano Approved' as an original work. Don't know how much is just a re-write of cgminer using a different language (Rust) and how much is new 'clean' code but the key point is that Braiins published the source code.

 
  I don't know the Real back story as to why he simply did not decide to sue bitmain over this.
Seems to me there would be enough money to interest some lawyers in some countries.
I do seem to think he said something about an agreement with bitmain of some kind. That is why he allows bitmain miners on the pool.
So If my crappy 64 year memory is correct then he would be okay in complaining about someone using bitmain bgminer without proper paperwork.

It is why I use braiins for aftermarket. As I think it is its own code.

Well, he is doing all that he can. He and -ck are not about to give cgminer to the FSF who are the only ones with the resources to go after violators. All he can do is 'shame' them. In the past already has made mention in their respective support threads of Bitmain, Inno, MicroBt and others violating the license but that is beating a dead horse especially since the other major (and Primary) developer (-ck) could care less. Canaan has been the one exception in that they DO (or least, did) publish their modified source code. That leaves nagging programmers who should know better and support the ideals of what Open Source is supposed to stand for.

How would they feel if someone decompiled or just repackaged  their code after adding a few tweaks to it and then proceeded to make money off of it? Pretty safe bet that said programmers would be highly miffed...

There is no evidence that suggests that the above is correct, for all we know, it could be more miners use custom firmware than not, we don't know, despite the fact that if I had to guess I'd guess that most use the OEM firmware, but that is irrelevant, just because the majority of miners use firmware that violate the license it does not make them better than the minority that uses a different firmware.

With that in mind, what if it was the other way around? imagine 90% of miners run custom firmware, based on your theory it would be okay to allow them to mine to the pool and block the stock firmware instead?



So, the theory is:

Stock firmware violate: we can't do shit about it, most people use it, fighting that is stupid, let's pretend it's okay for them to do that and move on.
Custom firmware: it's just a bunch of small devs, not so many people use it, let's sacrifice those as long as they remain a minority.

Honestly, I don't think what he is doing is necessarily a bad thing, but almost most of his posts are "defending the GPLv3 license", you would expect from someone who does that to actually fight against all parties that don't distribute the source code and that includes Bitmain and the other major manufacturers, if he won't do that, he should at least not bug every thread with these comments about the license which he himself isn't honoring by allowing the stock firmware to use his pool.

But in my point of view, this explanation is not answering my question. I really want to know what is the differences between one firmware that violates the same license with another one violating the same license?!
It makes me think that if you are big enough like bitmain, So we are ok with your license violation!?


For "Them" I mean all miners including devices with OEM firmware and others with custom firmware.
So it is correct if we really stop providing service to firmware which violate the license there will be no one left, excluding braiins.


Also to mention, we asked same partnership offer to the braiins team in the first place, but after some negotiations, we found their rules are not fair for such cooperation!
 

Is this the 2nd or 3rd time you've asked this after I've made a post replying to you explaining why?
Please go visit a doctor and have a check for Alzheimer's

The explanation is not weird: If one is running a pool then one must allow the OEM firmware because that is what the vast majority of miners use. It is tilting at windmills to do otherwise. Sure it bugs the hell out of him but it is what it is. A few years back even -ck bitched about Bitmain using cgminer but later backed off after a certain someone reminded him that he (-ck) led Bitmain down that path by refusing to do any work for the s1 even after BM sent him a miner to test on.

Now regarding,
"Them" of course is referring to miners using 3rd party firmware and yes he DOES prevent its usage on KanoPool. Part of the data exchanged between a miner and pool identifies what the firmware is and his pool software automatically disconnects any miner that is not running OEM firmware. The only exception is BoS because the sourcecode is published and that only works on the Solo pool until it is proven that BoS finds blocks. Once someone finds a BTC block with BoS and can prove it (preferably by mining it on the Solo pool) then BoS will also be allowed on the main pool.

Kano must have some weird explanation for why it's okay to allow stock firmware that violate the same license, he did mention it before, I just can't remember it, it probably didn't make any sense to me that's why I forgot, I would love to read the same excuse again.

S - I was really asking, what are they working on as in new features, pools, enhancements, new goodies to mess with!

On your site you have a download of the firmware.
That is called distributing it.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.57405338

I didn't understand your question.
If you are asking what we do as the Mineitor team?
We are providing a Remote monitoring and management solution with automation tools and alerts.
It helps farm owners to better manage and maintain their farms and devices. So they can reduce costs and increase revenue and increase their security from many aspects.

We respect the privacy of our customers and It's not like what Kano said that we don't care about the license. We haven't created any firmware and don't own it. We just provided an offer to the users of that firmware. And all the responsibility of how did they developed and what software they used in developing their firmware is with the Vnish team. So many users already are using their firmware whether we offer that service or not. We are just focused on our own company's success and growth. As I already said If we would want to not provide support for firmware that violating the CGMiner license, We have to drop support for almost all of the miners in the industry, not just Vnish. That's impossible. And keep in mind that we are not responsible for what others do.

Actually, I am in the same position as you but what am I trying to say is that 99% of this industry is not respecting the License.
Let's make it more clear,
Bitmain, Whatsminer, Innosilicon, and many more Even Goldshell that TSUB uses, which uses BFGMiner that also is violating the GPLv3 license.

So can we say 90% of the mining industry is currently violating Licenses? this means that 90% of your pool users are using devices and firmware that violate the GPLv3 license.

As Mineitor team we have three goals
1.Support any model and brand of miners which includes custom firmwares. so we can reach as many users.
2.Provide the best possible Customer Service.
3.Provide the best tools possible for monitoring and management.

As result, we can't lose the part of customers that is willing to use custom firmware. so we launched our partnership program which includes Vnish and in the future, there will be more.
 
Let's be honest with each other. You can't prevent them from using your pool. If you do then you will have to shutdown your service.
I looked at your website. You only prevent Custom Firmware. If you care, In the first place you need to stop using miners and giving service to them. Even firmware provided by the miner manufacturer

Now I am curious.  What they working on? 

You distribute it, so you are required to provide the source code.
That's how the GPLv3 license works.

There is custom firmware by the name "Luxor Tech" which I believe belongs to Luxor, so this makes 4 of them.

---

OP, I use AwesomeMiner and it's great, I have checked Mineitor and it looks as Awesome as AwesomeMiner.

I Am really happy that we could do our job. Adding support for new brands (new for us) is a part of our responsibilities usually it takes less than 24 hours to add support for other brands but I think our developers are a little busy at the moment. We really care about support since we think it is really important.
Thanks for your positive feedback.

You are right about CGminer License. But you are wrong about what we do. It is not our own Firmware.
Actually, we don't have our Firmware so we don't own the source code to share, It is part of our partnership program, all users are free to decide if they want to use Vnish Firmware or not. It is why we called the firmware Vnish-Mineitor. So users will know this is the same firmware with Vnish.
Many users don't care If custom firmware developers share the source code or not. Vnish is respected in the community among many users. so we respected and cooperated with them.
With your logic many miner manufacturers is violating CGminer License which also is connecting to your pool. so you are the supporter of them?

Well they're happy to violate the license, what else might they do inside their portal ...

Not using their firmware so not sure that matters (right?).

I like the insight their portal / controllers give.

This one violates the cgminer license also since they provide a firmware without the miner source code.

I have to say, working with the support team has been really nice.  Keep throwing curveballs at them and they keep adding and fixing!

Support for the latest Pi hardware - done
Adding Goldshell HS5 - done
Adding Luxor pools to support - in progress

I will have 2 controllers, one for my home farm and one for the colo farm.  Home farm setup and working!

So far so good!

That is why we have one month free subscription for Mineitor! just test it and find out your self.
We have 24/7 support. and also we have features that is unique to Mineitor.
E.g. Remote-browser  or Maintenance-Management or Customer-management , ...

Awesomeminer and HiveFarm violate the cgminer license since.
They have firmware that runs with their software that violates the license.

I've no idea about the other two.

I have only looked at the surface of the various Mining Farm software:

Awesomeminer
Mineitor
Luxor
HiveFarm

I am curious which folks are most impressed with?  I am currently using Luxor on an experimental basis but am wondering what the community thinks?