Pages:
Author

Topic: Z9 Series Full and Mini Modded Efudd NO-DEV FEE 100% - Individual Clocking - page 3. (Read 2171 times)

member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Hey, release whatever you want as long as it has 0 bytes of content from my 'lcgm' or the file I have named 'libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2'.

Good luck on that power inverter!

Also, thank you for this post, it resulted in a net increase of 79 new miners on 2.1d, so I definitely did "enjoy" as you requested.

Jason


See I can use whatever I want from it without any violation, its a matter of how I put it together, you cant copyright the code itself you can only try to copyright certain routines. There is more then 1 way to get the final process done that you cant copyright.

The code in lcgm and the contents that I named 'libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2' is 100% original code dude, not stuff built from someone else's work. You still don't seem to get that.

You are correct that the concept of "code" cannot be copyrighted, but algorithms and methods, *can* be patented. It is literally (and I know what the word 'literally' means) impossible for you to do what I did without violating copyright -- and you don't have the experience or knowledge to even understand that. I don't mean that to be an insult, you just don't show the aptitude to comprehend this.

Kinda like how you were arguing that people didn't understand your energy thing? Except in this, I'm right, and in that, you were wrong.. just like here, where you are wrong.

I mean, you tried to use the fact that you had previously released "my" firmware as an argument to support your energy claims. How ridiculous is that?

BUT, if you'd like to start, learn ARM assembly because a large portion of the core functionality was written in assembly, not C.

Anyway,

Good luck Mr Grams.

-j
member
Activity: 367
Merit: 34
Update:

Google pulled the link during the evaluation of the legal aspect of this firmware. After review Google's legal team has determined the firmware released is NOT in any violation of copyrights and has re-enable the download link.

It is determined that efudd has to follow the GPL license for the whole package and MUST allow changes to the package, In order for him to get around this he must do a complete firmware package from scratch and not use the original firmware as his base for modifications.

Told you Jason you had to claim...……..

Can you please tell me more about "circular energy"?

Also, you might want to check again.

--snip--
We're sorry. You can't access this item because it is in violation of our Terms of Service.

Find out more about this topic at the Google Drive Help Center.
--snip--

-j

It will be working fine soon, I received notice on it earlier that it will be re-enabled



Good luck Mr. Grams. While we're waiting, hope about that circular energy? Can you update us on how your attempt to turn 500W into 5000W+ worked out?

-j

You can look into it yourself, I have no help for you on anything. If you want info follow that thread.

You abandoned that thread right around the time your first power bill showed up lolololol
jr. member
Activity: 559
Merit: 4
Hey, release whatever you want as long as it has 0 bytes of content from my 'lcgm' or the file I have named 'libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2'.

Good luck on that power inverter!

Also, thank you for this post, it resulted in a net increase of 79 new miners on 2.1d, so I definitely did "enjoy" as you requested.

Jason


See I can use whatever I want from it without any violation, its a matter of how I put it together, you cant copyright the code itself you can only try to copyright certain groups of routines. There is more then 1 way to get the final process done that you cant copyright.

There is only 1 variation of your stuff the 2.0c the rest are original work.

I will add any common routine or codes already known to the public cant be copyrighted
member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Hey, release whatever you want as long as it has 0 bytes of content from my 'lcgm' or the file I have named 'libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2'.

Good luck on that power inverter!

Also, thank you for this post, it resulted in a net increase of 79 new miners on 2.1d, so I definitely did "enjoy" as you requested.

I'll see you on your next release -- this was your what, 4th release of firmware? You have 5 new threads on bitcointalk, 4 of which are variations on my firmware, one is 'free energy'.

Have a nice evening, Mark.

Jason
jr. member
Activity: 559
Merit: 4
Mark,

Please see https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239?hl=en&ref_topic=4558877 - specifically the section titled "Can Google determine copyright ownership?"

-j

However it turns out I have a backup plan... I guess if you want it stopped the next step is federal court and we can let the courts decide.

Keep editing your original post... your lies just compound. First it was "the link has been restored", then it was "it will be restored in 72 hours", then it was "I have a backup plan!"...

Sadly, I think you actually believe the things you say.

I would suggest you read up on Dunning-Kruger, but you would not get it.

-j

Rather then go back and forth with you I am going switch to what I should have done in the beginning, you can count this as a win or whatever you want, I only call it a small setback. Nope no notice, it was a decision I made rather then sit and go back and forth
member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Mark,

Please see https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239?hl=en&ref_topic=4558877 - specifically the section titled "Can Google determine copyright ownership?"

-j

However it turns out I have a backup plan... I guess if you want it stopped the next step is federal court and we can let the courts decide.

Better yet I will just enable my backup plan, I will remove the link for now, it is out there enough for people to share until the new version comes out.

Ah, I guess you just received the takedown notice for USC. 17 Section 1201, also and are trying to adjust on the fly as a result?

Keep editing...

-j
member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Mark,

Please see https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239?hl=en&ref_topic=4558877 - specifically the section titled "Can Google determine copyright ownership?"

-j

However it turns out I have a backup plan... I guess if you want it stopped the next step is federal court and we can let the courts decide.

Keep editing your original post... your lies just compound. First it was "the link has been restored", then it was "it will be restored in 72 hours", then it was "I have a backup plan!"...

Sadly, I think you actually believe the things you say.

I would suggest you read up on Dunning-Kruger, but you would not get it.

-j
jr. member
Activity: 559
Merit: 4
Mark,

Please see https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239?hl=en&ref_topic=4558877 - specifically the section titled "Can Google determine copyright ownership?"

-j

However it turns out I have a backup plan... I guess if you want it stopped the next step is federal court and we can let the courts decide.

Better yet I will just enable my backup plan, I will remove the link for now, it is out there enough for people to share until the new version comes out.
member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Mark,

Please see https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239?hl=en&ref_topic=4558877 - specifically the section titled "Can Google determine copyright ownership?"

-j
member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Update:

Google pulled the link during the evaluation of the legal aspect of this firmware. After review Google's legal team has determined the firmware released is NOT in any violation of copyrights and has re-enable the download link.

It is determined that efudd has to follow the GPL license for the whole package and MUST allow changes to the package, In order for him to get around this he must do a complete firmware package from scratch and not use the original firmware as his base for modifications.

Told you Jason you had to claim...……..

Can you please tell me more about "circular energy"?

Also, you might want to check again.

--snip--
We're sorry. You can't access this item because it is in violation of our Terms of Service.

Find out more about this topic at the Google Drive Help Center.
--snip--

-j

It will be working fine soon, I received notice on it earlier that it will be re-enabled



Good luck Mr. Grams. While we're waiting, hope about that circular energy? Can you update us on how your attempt to turn 500W into 5000W+ worked out?

-j
member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Update:

Google pulled the link during the evaluation of the legal aspect of this firmware. After review Google's legal team has determined the firmware released is NOT in any violation of copyrights and has re-enable the download link.

It is determined that efudd has to follow the GPL license for the whole package and MUST allow changes to the package, In order for him to get around this he must do a complete firmware package from scratch and not use the original firmware as his base for modifications.

Told you Jason you had to claim...……..

Can you please tell me more about "circular energy"?

Also, you might want to check again.

--snip--
We're sorry. You can't access this item because it is in violation of our Terms of Service.

Find out more about this topic at the Google Drive Help Center.
--snip--

-j
newbie
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
efudd, you're arguing with someone that thinks he can lower his electric bill by running his miners off an inverter powered by a wind turbine generator, thats being driven from an electric motor plugged back into the house electric.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/alternative-electricity-for-mining-5093693

comprehension isnt his strong suit.

he comes up with half baked schemes because he just wants to be in the "club" of contributors so he can try to get free handouts to his crypto addresses.

omg, thanks for this... good toilet entertainment!
jr. member
Activity: 559
Merit: 4
This is a fun thing to read I have to say.  I will agree with one thing that is being said here, the fees (efudd).  I believe every developer should get paid.  I have seen your firmware and thought of trying it.  But the dev fees outweigh the rewards.  Now this is honestly your choice since you did do work to make it work correctly.  But a small one time use fee or a 0.5% could be considered more  reasonable.  Also the back door into your the miner shouldn't be there.  Bitmain does it, and I wish I was smart enough to remove it, but I am not.  Maybe that is something you could eliminate, for everyone including yourself.  But this is just my 0.02 so it means nothing.

Thank you for your input. I do agree developers should get paid with that said, when I did try to do legit business with him on the fw he acted like an ass because I pointed out the control he had and I released a free version for batch 4 minis. He also led people on by offering a licensed version then pulls the license and says dev only from now on unless you have a large number of units. In my opinion at that point he realized he can profit more from dev only and didn't care about getting the miners the most out of the machines as he claims.

He accused me of trying to rip him off when I was asking legit questions for legit business and before I even considered looking into the fw. His actions led me to look into the GPL fw he started with and I then made a decision once I determined I had the right to change what I wanted. It is all in black and white in the GPL license terms as to how and when I can change his files. He needs to package his files as a upgrade without the original files, only his, because once he packages it with the GPL fw he has to follow the GPL terms the way he linked everything together. I am not demanding his source code which under GPL he is required to release for his 2.1 versions, in those versions he changed cgminer which is open source which he is required to supply the source code if requested.

I don't care about the money part of it and if people want to donate to him still that is great, if they want to donate to me for my work then fine too, but this isn't about the money, it is about getting the most out of the miner investment and being honest and forward with people who want to use the fw… No backdoors, no you pissed me off so I am shutting down your miner, and no random dev fee connections or failure to come out of dev mode.



member
Activity: 367
Merit: 34
efudd, you're arguing with someone that thinks he can lower his electric bill by running his miners off an inverter powered by a wind turbine generator, thats being driven from an electric motor plugged back into the house electric.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/alternative-electricity-for-mining-5093693

comprehension isnt his strong suit.

he comes up with half baked schemes because he just wants to be in the "club" of contributors so he can try to get free handouts to his crypto addresses.
newbie
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
This is a fun thing to read I have to say.  I will agree with one thing that is being said here, the fees (efudd).  I believe every developer should get paid.  I have seen your firmware and thought of trying it.  But the dev fees outweigh the rewards.  Now this is honestly your choice since you did do work to make it work correctly.  But a small one time use fee or a 0.5% could be considered more  reasonable.  Also the back door into your the miner shouldn't be there.  Bitmain does it, and I wish I was smart enough to remove it, but I am not.  Maybe that is something you could eliminate, for everyone including yourself.  But this is just my 0.02 so it means nothing.
newbie
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
well that was entertaining.

I may not explain it all correctly...
Unethical yes...
member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
jr. member
Activity: 559
Merit: 4
Sadly it is difficult to have meaningful discourse when intelligence does not exist.

Following your moronic logic. Take the original firmware, delete that file, observe that things run.

Your argument is that every single thing with the same file name is the same. Can you even comprehend how ridiculous that is?

And again, like the countless other things you are wrong on, you are simply wrong on the earnings. The firmware brings in about 35 dollars usd a day.

And your argument also forgets that the factory firmware provided 42KSol/second by spec and units running my firmware have an average of 57kSol with the latest units exceeding 62Ksol.

Hopefully your intelligence level will let you see that is greater than 3%.

As far as “hiding errors” goes, you are incorrect there as usual. Go take a stock firmware and evaluate what happens in the logs vs the dashboard and you might be able to see. An “x” in the dashboard ONLY occurs when an asic COMPLETELY goes offline. Nothing is changed in that handling.

The only loophole is you managed to get your hands on a firmware that was out for about 4 hours before I realized there was a mistake in DNS handling. It was fixed in my changelogs the early morning of 10/24 and will not work on any of the 2.1 and later releases. There is literally zero “mini” functionality in the 2.0 train.

I encourage you to perform and develop your own content, but I do not believe you have that ability.

I would honestly explain how it all works if I thought you had the capacity to comprehend, but clearly you do not.

The takedowns have been submitted and I guess we will just wait for process to happen.

-j

I got over 55k with stock fw just like most could have with the smartass111 or my release last year.

My argument is you replaced a factory file therefore leaving it open to any mods desired, if you would have used another file name then the situation would be looked at different by me. You have already admitted the original file was linked to others on the OS therefore replacing it leaves it open to anything under the GPL and other laws.

You left the hole I used it plain and simple. I already have it partially working on a mini. I look forward for the takedown, that wont stop it there are many servers to use where your takedown will be ignored. For the 2.0 and 2.1 versions you have no claim for a takedown all you have is you made a mistake and it cost you, under GPL once you changed the factory files you lost claim plain and simple. As I said choose different files names that aren't part of the OS as it was distributed or covered under the GPL and I wont touch it.

You want to keep commenting on my intelligence but yet I was smart enough to get past your hack, don't under estimate what others can do, I may not explain it all correctly but I can sure make things work when I need to. It's funny your crying because your hack got hacked and now you want to claim GPL and copyrights on your hack/hijack. Good luck with that one... Unethical yes, illegal or violation of GPL or copyright no.



member
Activity: 504
Merit: 51
Sadly it is difficult to have meaningful discourse when intelligence does not exist.

Following your moronic logic. Take the original firmware, delete that file, observe that things run.

Your argument is that every single thing with the same file name is the same. Can you even comprehend how ridiculous that is?

And again, like the countless other things you are wrong on, you are simply wrong on the earnings. The firmware brings in about 35 dollars usd a day.

And your argument also forgets that the factory firmware provided 42KSol/second by spec and units running my firmware have an average of 57kSol with the latest units exceeding 62Ksol.

Hopefully your intelligence level will let you see that is greater than 3%.

As far as “hiding errors” goes, you are incorrect there as usual. Go take a stock firmware and evaluate what happens in the logs vs the dashboard and you might be able to see. An “x” in the dashboard ONLY occurs when an asic COMPLETELY goes offline. Nothing is changed in that handling.

The only loophole is you managed to get your hands on a firmware that was out for about 4 hours before I realized there was a mistake in DNS handling. It was fixed in my changelogs the early morning of 10/24 and will not work on any of the 2.1 and later releases. There is literally zero “mini” functionality in the 2.0 train.

I encourage you to perform and develop your own content, but I do not believe you have that ability.

I would honestly explain how it all works if I thought you had the capacity to comprehend, but clearly you do not.

The takedowns have been submitted and I guess we will just wait for process to happen.

-j
jr. member
Activity: 559
Merit: 4
You know what dude, fighting with me is ridiculous since I am someone who was trying to *HELP THE COMMUNITY GET THE MOST OUT OF THEIR MINERS*.

You don't fscking understand dynamic vs. static linking. And lcgm and the .so.2 are *NOT* linked to cgminer and cannot be because cgminer is not a fscking library you fscking idiot.

And the original ".so.2" was a SHARED LIBRARY that other things would dynamically link to, you imbecile. If it was static, you wouldn't see it on the filesystem! Using the same _filename_ does not make the new contents exist under GPL as you so ignorantly and stubbornly assume.

These miners came out, purposefully gimped from the factory. I took the time to unlock them and release it to the community.

Then folk had issues with certain boards on specific batches, so I made a modification to let them get the most out of their system.

Then folk wanted voltage controls... well, you've just ensured that all future work stops because I refuse to sit here and defend against fscking idiots like yourself over and over.

My claims are on lcgm and and the the contents of the file named libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2, not the packaging. You are distributing my work in the packing you provided.

BTW, shit from idiots like yourself is why Bliss moved on also.

.. and the reason why I would have said "a billion dollars" or whatever to you is because you have been ignorantly annoying from the beginning speaking out of your ass with your posts and questions.

Good luck.

(Yeah folk, I *CAN* be an asshole, but most of the time I'm not.. and those of you who have dealt with me privately know that.)

-j

Again, once you replace the file with a different one needed by the firmware you lost any claim regardless of the contents. You should have chosen a different file name I guess, and lcgm well, the s02 file cant run without it, and cgminer wont run without any of it, neither will the firmware OS, should have made a plugin instead of a complete disable of cgminer when you feel like disabling it or whatever you had control of. All you did was wrote a program to hijack cgminer disabling the cgminer without your modified files leaving you no legal standing, unethical yes but not illegal for me to modify it again. Your release also hides the x errors on the web status screen most the time but can be seen in the kernel logs, just to inform you. The crappy part for you is it got hijacked by itself, no new packaging just opened your "out" file as a hdd and edited it there only repack was back to a .gz otherwise its all there just as it was origionally packed in the image

And do you really think you were making people extra money?

Most machines didn't get enough improvement with individual clocking and many didn't even get a 3% increase which breaks them even with the dev fee so in the end they are mining to put money in your pocket while paying for the electric.

That's really getting the most out of their machine. The dev fee is putting about 100+ a day in your pocket which is more than most miners are making in a week.

I am sorry if you don't continue but I would rather see everyone get the most out of their machines now before the difficulty gets to a point where they are scrapping their machines. Besides the voltage increase .vs the increased profit is not good at current coin prices, raising the voltage and clocks use more electricity then you will make in profit again just putting their extra profit in your pocket. So no matter what way you do it you are always in a win win situation and the miner takes the loss.

I will be fair with you... Any new version that does not eliminate any original file from the firmware and does not hijack cgminer without being selected from the miner configuration screen I will leave alone but any modified or replaced factory os file is open game for new modifications. This time you left me a loophole next time do it different.


Pages:
Jump to: